It’s no secret that The Detroit News (DTN) likes to cheer for the home team. It’s also no surprise that the financially challenged paper imports low-cost out-of-town talent to satisfy their product needs– just like the domestic automakers they support. So when I read Washington Post writer Warren Brown’s analysis of GM’s fortunes on the DTN website, I was hardly stunned to discover a happy clappy Pollyanna puff piece. Like his prickly personality, Brown’s nose for news is distinctly stuffy; his piece embodies and elevates mindless pro-GM optimism to new heights.
“What is it about the human condition that so delights in the negative?” Brown’s opening sentence demands. (I’m feeling you Warren.) Clearly, GM naysayers have put Brown’s nose out of joint. To avoid any accusations of dancing on GM's grave– sorry, jinxing The General’s rehab, let’s skip to the bit of Brown’s bombast that has captured the attention of the GM faithful, and do a little factual intervention.
Never one to miss an opportunity to lord it over the boorish riff-raff commonly known as his colleagues (I’m feeling you Warren), Brown chastises auto scribes for continuing to question (publicly!) GM’s viability. In fact, these know-nothing car hacks are so blinkered by their negative nature they fail to recognize that The General has “rediscovered its fighting and innovative spirits.”
“There is proof in the new Saturn Aura sedan and the new Chevrolet Silverado pickup truck, which together swept the North American car and truck of the year honors at the show — ironically, awards given by some of the journalists who later were questioning GM's ability to survive.”
While TTAC’s reviewer wouldn’t have given the gong to the Silverado, I’ll spot Brown that one (you feeling me Warren?). But pinning GM’s future on Aura sales is like depending on an infantry assault to defeat an entrenched machine gun position. The truth is the Aura is getting slaughtered.
In its first three months, Saturn sold 19,746 Auras. If the model sustains those numbers– and that’s a big “if”– the Aura will generate roughly 80k sales per year. While the projected annual tally would dwarf ’05 sales of the similarly platformed Saab 9-3 (24,133), it would fail to surmount the, gulp, Buick Lucerne (96,515). To put that into perspective, last year GM sold 323,981 Chevrolet Impalas, 312,747 Cobalt/HHR’s, 157,644 G6’s and 163,853 Chevrolet Malibus.
To put THAT into perspective, between 34 and 60 percent of those models went to rental fleets. In other words, in the battle for the mass market, the award-winning pride of Detroit Saturn Aura is another, even smaller, damp squib.
Anyway, Brown’s nose may not be growing like Pinocchio’s, but he certainly doesn’t know a scam when he sees one. Our Capital correspondent views the press' skepticism about the Chevrolet Volt concept car as yet more evidence that GM critical TTAC-types are simply cynical bastards. Brown considers the Volt “tangible proof” of GM’s right-minded “intentions.”
Yes, well, the road to bankruptcy is paved with good intentions. While GM has hoodwinked Brown and his ilk by claiming that the lithium-ion battery-powered Volt will hit showrooms in three to five years, experts are snorting coffee out their noses.
“Lithium-ion chemistry still has issues for automotive applications,” Don Runkle told Bloomberg News. The former GM engineer and chairman of battery maker EaglePicher Holdings Inc. isn't buying GM's development timeline. “Everyone tries to pooh-pooh thermal runaway (overheating), but this is nasty stuff. If it screws up, you have a dead serious fire on your hands.”
Never mind analyzing the facts; Brown is too busy mocking the “media murmuring”: “Is GM serious? How can they afford it? Is this just a ploy to get money from the federal government? Toyota will probably beat them to the punch first, don't you think? It's a good idea but so what? It'll take them 10 years to bring it to market.”
As the Brits would say, you gotta laugh, mate. The same man who raises a condescending arched eyebrow at the “irony” of automotive journalists handing out awards to the company whose survival they question smirks at implications that the Volt is a ploy for federal subsidies. Yet he recognizes, welcomes even, The Big Two Point Five’s post-Volt request for a $500m federal hand-out to develop automotive battery technology.
Hang on; doesn’t the fact that GM [alone] can’t afford such mission critical, company-saving research trigger any alarm bells for the Capitol curmudgeon? Nope, he’s off politicizing the debate, defending the government handout as a way to avoid foreign troop engagements.
Oh wait, that’s just me being negative again. Luckily, Brown's gonna cut us death watchers a bit of slack. “Perhaps such chatter is inevitable. It is easier to believe in failure than it is to achieve, or sustain success.” Hey Warren; do me a favor. Tell it to GM.
As read by Robert Farago below.
[Read the original DTN article here.]
I have to give credit to GM (doing such is SO against my nature….) – the Saturn is a looker and would certainly be on my radar screen if I was in the market for a mid-sized sedan, and certainly so if they bring the wagon version over.
Sadly, every day I also see the same Auras languishing on the dealer’s lot near my house, along with the Ion, Relay and Vue. Only the Outlook and Sky seem to be selling as soon as they get them….
The abundant fleet sales have to stop. Ford was wise to do this with the substandard Taurus. We rented a $32k (msrp) Grand Prix this summer with 3k on the odo….it was a piece of crap, especially the flimsy plastics…..and then an Envoy two weeks later. THAT’S my impression of GM…..
As has been mentioned before, GM (except for their work trucks) represents discount auto….and probably will not command retail/resale prices of Toyota and Honda anytime soon.
Pity, really, because my generation usually can’t see past the Grand Prix to realize the Aura is a whole new mindset.
FYI: Sajeev’s review of the Aura:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2191
and the Silverado:
https://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/?p=2761
Like it or not, the popular perception at this moment is that GM is getting off the mat. While this may be nothing more than a sign that GM PR has finally returned to “world-class” levels, such perceptions can become self-fulfilling. If people start to think that the upcoming Malibu (for instance) is a legitimized alternative to the Camry and Accord, more shoppers will check it out and some of those people will buy.
As for the Volt, it’s clearly a plea for public research dollars but it’s also a huge PR play, and it’s looking like a big success from here.
Spin wins? I don't think so.
Another, more objective view of GM’s chances comes from the investment community. What was once the world’s largest corporation is now valued at slightly more than 8% of Toyota’s market cap, or just over 12% of Honda’s.
The fact that they still have a Saturn division says much more about their future viability than whether its new midsize sedan is a homerun. At this point, even a genuinely new mindset won’t do much more than slow the bleeding.
Brown considers the Volt “tangible proof” of GM’s right-minded “intentions.”
Ah, the road to Hell. There’s no speed limit on that highway.
Chevy Volt just got my nomination for the next few years’ Wired News Vaporware awards.
Was I lucky to review both award-winning rides or what?
While TTAC’s reviewer wouldn’t have given the gong to the Silverado…
Yup, it is a bland redesign that doesn’t convincingly surpass its dated competition (Ford). But I’d give the nod to the Aura, its a nice car even with the poor interior choices.
Its a damn shame the Aura doesn’t sell like the Impala. If it happened, I can see an upturn in goodwill to the GM brand. Its like using chrome GM badges on everything, except it’ll work.
Then again, a Saturn never outsells a Chevy. Too many divisions, too many models, not enough focus.
Spin wins? maybe not, but it does get you noticed.
For all the wrong reasons.
As the Sex Pistols once said: Never mind the Bollox.
Here’s the truth:
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines01/0510-01.htm
$1.4 billion of tax payers dollars. Remember THAT come April 15th!
What to show for it?
Absolutely NOTHING!
“Five years off….that is, five years and another $500,000,000 thank you very much!”.
How can anyone with a (any?) sense of morality sit there and tell his readers the GM is on the road to redemption, when the company he writes of has had not one, but MANY chances to redeem itself….all to no avail.
Forget redemption, how about a purposeful path to NON-redemption?
http://www.ev1.org/ceo.htm
Yes, that’s right….CRUSH the EV1 and all the hopes and dreams of those who created it.
Many of you will one day consider “upgrading” your Windows machine to Windows Vista. Makes sense, right? Perhaps you’ll “upgrade” your HD at the same time.
GM? Destroy!! Destroy and ask tax-payers for more money!!
This business practice I find to be absolutely repugnant. All coming from those who profess to be the Guardian of the American way of life.
I was never raised to believe the American way of life depended on handouts. Not only is GM rotting away financially, they are morally bankrupt to boot.
In other words, I don’t care HOW great their product is, I will henceforth avoid it at ALL cost (rebates be damned!).
Actually, the battarey technology is there already. You can watercool batteries just as easy as you watercool engines, which, together with judiciously chosen pack size, will easily make your cell pack fire-proof. Tesla Roadster is a very good proof of concept, actually.
I’m pretty sure the next-gen Prius will have li-ion cells in it, and it’ll probably have a configuration similar to that of Volt. So yeah, Toyota will beat GM to it. Because Volt kind of vechicle has been possible ever since high-discharge Li-Ion cells were available. The fact that GM has the guts to ask half a billion (which they’ll probably get) to develop a technology that already exists is mindboggling.
There is indeed a reflex to root for the home time – and I for one want GM (and Ford and DCX for that matter) to pull their fingers out and actually start competing out there. There is still lots of turf out there to be had and consumers are fickle for the most part.
The new Aura is a nice start, and the new 2008 Mailbu will easily surpass 240,000 (fleet sales or no). If the Impala goes RWD and looks/drives like the Holden ? as I have heard then why would you even consider a Honda Bland or Toyota LoungeChair?
My sense is that all profuscations of GM’s imminent demise are ill-conceived and superficial. NA may indeed be lost (not really) but there is always China – the land of the slave and the home of the cheap (cars that is).
Does the Aura have Saturn’s plastic body? The Saturns that I’ve driven suffered from significant wind noise at speed because of the necessary gaps in the body panels.
Actually, the battarey technology is there already. You can watercool batteries just as easy as you watercool engines, which, together with judiciously chosen pack size, will easily make your cell pack fire-proof. Tesla Roadster is a very good proof of concept, actually.
I’m pretty sure the next-gen Prius will have li-ion cells in it, and it’ll probably have a configuration similar to that of Volt. So yeah, Toyota will beat GM to it. Because Volt kind of vechicle has been possible ever since high-discharge Li-Ion cells were available. The fact that GM has the guts to ask half a billion (which they’ll probably get) to develop a technology that already exists is mindboggling
Practical issues still exist with lithium ion batteries, that are currently being worked out. Sure, the technology certainly *is* there, but the key is to implement it in a practical, cost-effective way.
And yes, the next-gen Prius likely will have lithium ion batteries. Keep in mind Toyota is not only a leader with hybrid technology, they’ve partnered with some of the best battery makers in the world to help with research and development. Panasonic is one such company, and Fuji Heavy Industries is another one. GM, being late to the hybrid party, has not had as much time researching battery and hybrid technology, and further does not have close relationships with that much world leading battery makers.
Toyota has had full hybrids for sale for several years now, while GM’s two-mode hybrids have yet to hit the market. Toyota’s next-gen hybrid system is right around the corner, and it just may be a step ahead of the two-mode GM system.
The Volt concept is nothing more than an act of desperation on the part of GM to show confidence and to keep the media from absolutely ripping them apart.
The perception today is that,G.M.is turning around.
Many in the media are jumping on the band wagon.
From my view point that is not a real bad thing.Whose right whose wrong?Time will tell.
Let not not loose sight of the fact, GM still is the number 1
car maker in the world.
We may be in the late rounds but there is still some fight left.
In the world, maybe. But what is the market trend for GM in this country? And how do you define”turning around”?
Are you talking people trading in their Camrys for Malibus? Turning in their Civics for Cobalts?
To me, GM has its hands full trying to keep what customers have stayed with them, and winning over converts from”the other side” is a mere pipe dream.
As you say, GM may have some fight left, but those that have left them merely yawn, turn around, and walk away.
Many times at the dealership I work for I ask people what made them buy their car instead of a GM or Ford. They look at me like I just grew 3 heads, laugh, say “Never again” and change the subject.
Excuse me for asking this, but why are we still pursuing the chimera of the electric car? After quite a few decades of research we are still short of that (literally) quantum leap in battery technology that we have to have to make it work. Given the billions already spent, why would anyone thing that an extra billion is going to do it?
The essential point is that making an Audi like interior is a reasonable goal, and something they SHOULD be striving for along with a four cylinder motor that approaches a Honda for smoothness. The Volt may make the CEO all warm and fuzzy inside, but it does nothing to address the true difficulties that GM has. Their house is burning down and they’re standing around arguing drapery colors…..
Terry
I’m afraid thats true,some of the buyers that GM P.Oed will never come back.
I do think GM can keep the market they got and will win over some buyers that know good value for the money.
I’m sure theres a few million employees,investers,suppliers and dealers that are betting on it.
The Li-on cells exist and there’s nothing new in them. I’m confident that the heat issues of large cells can be solved too.
What I haven’t seen anywhere is the lifespan expectancy for them. Volt is a a plug-in concept, meaning that the battery usage model is identical to li-on laptop and cell phone batteries. Every one of those I’ve had has lost it’s ability to hold original charge in 2-3 years. Some of the reasons for failure are listed here.
Spin may not win, but perception counts. I bet that unveiling the Volt in Detroit was intended as the green counterpunch to Toyota’s unveiling of the somewhat less fuel efficient Tundra at the same show (otherwise, it would have made more sense to unveil at LA). It appears to have worked, as the enviros are starting to nip at the heels of Toyota, who now haven’t done anything for them lately…..
And, it doesn’t help their perception when half a million of the new big rigs and their Sequoia bretheren are recalled to fix a steering(!) defect. Not to mention the “quiet” recall on 3.5 million (!!) Lexus vehicles for engine sludge. Pretty nice “GM-in-the-70’s” response from Toyota, blaming their customers for “lack of proper maintenance”, rather than admitting that it’s quite easy to screw up the engineering of a sophisticated OHC engine.
GM may be to be late to the hybrid party, but they are buying their Ni-MH batteries for the Vue Green Line from the Cobasys subsidiary of Energy Conversion Devices of Troy Michigan, which has been developing the technology as long as anyone. And, don’t forget the GM dual mode hybrid system which will be introduced this fall in the full size SUVs has been in commercial production for several years now, in urban transit bus applications, a cost-effective application quietly saving cities plenty of fuel $$. I’m surprised and disappointed that the company hasn’t promoted this application more vigorously.
As has been pointed out here a few times, Toyota’s financial resources allow it to take more chances, and green light programs (like the Prius) that don’t make economic sense, but help the companies perception. Obviously, they take perception seriously. GM and Ford are under much more pressure to eke out a return on any of their investments. Survival trumps perception.
The Volt concept is a bit more than an act of desperation. It demonstrates that when the technology is ready and commercially viable, GM will have it on the road. Let’s haul that goal back into the street…..it’s “game ON”!
CliffG: The essential point is that making an Audi like interior is a reasonable goal, and something they SHOULD be striving for along with a four cylinder motor that approaches a Honda for smoothness. Excellent point. I'd like to see a Corvette with the world's best interior at the auto show, rather than another pie-in-the-sky hi-tech balloon. GM's ADD is well out of control. It's the basics, stupid. Captain Tungsten: GM may be to be late to the hybrid party, May be? That's kind of you. In fact, by the time they arrive, Toyota will have left, showered, changed, picked out a new ensemble and returned. Am I the only one who's sick of GM's flavor-of-the-moment new tech development announcements: hybrids. hydrogen fuel cells, E85, electric cars, etc. Why doesn't GM just admit they're no longer the hi-tech go-to guys and either buy the stuff from someone (yes, even Toyota) or forget about it and build something really great with existing technology? (See: above.) CarNut: The new Aura is a nice start, and the new 2008 Mailbu will easily surpass 240,000 (fleet sales or no). If the Impala goes RWD and looks/drives like the Holden ? as I have heard then why would you even consider a Honda Bland or Toyota LoungeChair? Yup, the new Malibu is the next Next Big Thing. Leaving aside your predictions for the scope of the Malibu's success and the fact that fleet sales or no is THE question that SHOULD be asked, I'm intruiged that you think the average Honda or Toyota buyer could be brought back into the GM fold (so to speak) by the look and rwd-edness of the new Malibu. If the Malibu struck out in a new design direction like the 300C, well, um, maybe. The next gen version shown at the NAIAS looks like… the Aura (surprise, surprise). Which, as reported, ain't exactly flying off the shelves. And while I'm a rear wheel-drive kinda guy, I don't think that's a big sales point for this sort of vehicle. The cooking version, sure, but not for the bread-and-butter stuff. More to the point, do you REALLY think it's that easy to win back a Honda or Toyota customer? Bland lounge chairs sell, obviously. Wouldn't GM have to do something, anything, a lot more that just crease some sheetmetal and put the power through the rear wheels?
The Aura is out? I’ve yet to see one… In fact I’ve yet to see a single advertisement for it – something that yet again points to one of GM’s biggest problems: too many divisions stretching everything too thin.
I find it incredibly *positive* of Mr. Brown to praise the technology of the Volt when GM’s track record with new tech is one of the worst in the industry – how about that corvair for the rear engine layout? Or how about their first go at cylinder deactivation? EV1 was all about great intentions… The switch to FWD sure went well didn’t it?
GM has a LONG history of under-developing, under-testing, under-supporting breakthrough product. Thinking it’s different now could very well be a $500M mistake, assuming it ends there. Toyota has one of the best reputations for overall reliability (not just acceptable initial quality the last 3 yrs), and even they’ve had some problems with Priuses.
The whole premise behind the GM:DW is that GM hasn’t yet changed enough to be a sustainable business; Mr. Brown certainly doesn’t make the case that it is, especially while advocating government subsidies.
especially while advocating government subsidies.
The threat of imprisonment (just try NOT paying them…ie, taxes) lends me to believe that these are “tax payer’s subsidies”.
If we start seeing the “truth” of the matter, then yes, I would expect more people to get upset.
Demand more for YOUR labor!!
mikey:
January 20th, 2007 at 3:52 pm
Terry
I’m afraid thats true,some of the buyers that GM P.Oed will never come back.
I do think GM can keep the market they got and will win over some buyers that know good value for the money.
I’m sure theres a few million employees,investers,suppliers and dealers that are betting on it.
Agreed, Mikey! Now all they need is buyers!
Reminds me of one of Steve Martin’s lines where he says…
“There are 2 steps to becoming a millionaire. First, get a million dollars…”
Robert –
Yes, actually – this only addresses the product side of this condition. For starters (and has been said many times by many others) – I would like to see GM kill off Buick, Pontiac and Saab, and start crystallizing the remaining brands. Rather than attempting to service a network of disparate and overlapping dealers all GM cars would be sold in a single location – the “GM Store” or call it what you will. This would allow them to focus design and engineering resources in a more targeted and cooordinated fashion (and largely help their main problem of being a company stretched way too thin).
On the issues of public perception and resale value (largely the spawn of consumer sentiment rather than percieved long term value) – this will be addressed through innovative and exhilirating design, leading rather than following in terms of new benchmarks for quality, fuel efficiency and performance, and giving Mr. American Car Buyer a reason to shop GM again.
I truly think GM is headed in the right direction on the product side, perhaps too many directions at once (LOL) but still mostly going forward.
In short, they need to become a more agile company, able to execute across all of the segments they are in. This is a tall order for a company of their size and history, but I am starting to see some reasons for hope.
(And of course if all else fails, there is still China…)
postcript – I just read Edmunds review of the Saturn Aura XR, and it is glowing on most counts. If GM can deliver this type of sophistication and attention to detail across the board (or even most models), then the future looks bright. The Accord and Camry have nothing on this Saturn (but lower market depreciation that is – a big deal, granted).
“Everyone tries to pooh-pooh thermal runaway (overheating), but this is nasty stuff. If it screws up, you have a dead serious fire on your hands.”
Maybe GM can have Lucas develop the batteries since they have lots of experience with thermal runaway.
RF: I think you overestimate Toyota's tech advantage. Their electric RAV4 was certainly no more successful in the market than GM's EV1. They were still below the radar in those days, so it's launch and subsequent withdrawal from the market didn't make anywhere near the news of GM's EV1. Both vehicles were responses to California's demand for true ZEV vehicles, yet another example of government demanding the technically possible, but commercially unfeasible vehicle. They successfully launched the Hybrid Synergy Drive in several light vehicles, but without regard for any reasonable return on investment. GM's Two Mode Hybrid System is the technological equal of that system, and is in commercial production (and making some money for GM). GM is now displaying it's approach to the plug in hybrid. Toyota is touting it's next gen HSD, just a bigger, more powerful version of the one on the road today. Both companies are actively working on fuel cell vehicles, and both acknowledge the challenges getting them ready for commercial production. And even in conventional gas engines, GM technology is competitive with Toyota. For example, Toyota's new 5.7L V8 for the Tundra has great numbers. But it doesn't outdistance GM's 6L V8 by much. GM hasn't deployed as many OHC and VVT engines as Toyota. But where is their cylinder deactivation technology? And yes, GM is a cog or two behind in it's automatic transmissions, but again, not a technology problem, but a resource availability problem. But there we go with perception again….perception that Toyota is a technology leader.
Captain Tungsten wrote, “They [Toyota] successfully launched the Hybrid Synergy Drive in several light vehicles, but without regard for any reasonable return on investment.”
I see this allegation or its companion, “they lose money on every Prius” all the time. What I have not seen is a credible citation supporting it. As far as I can tell it’s BS from GM Apologists.
However, just for giggles, let’s assume that Toyota isn’t making any money on the Prius. The thing still serves a purpose; it’s making money for the dealers. Think of it as a dealer subsidy – at thing GM can not afford to do.
Exactly 50 years ago, GM was designing the Corvair, its first of very many “import fighters”: Vega, Chevette, Citation, Celebrity, Cavalier, Corsica, Saturn SL1, “new” Malibu, Cobalt, “newer” Malibu, Ion, and now, the “newest” Malibu.
Goodwill is an intangible with an assigned value a corporation accumulates, typically from the assumption of continued future sales from its satified customer base.
GM long ago went bankrupt in goodwill with “consumers that have imports on their shopping lists” (GM quote). Even if the “newest” Malibu was fully the equal of Camcord, it won’t undo 50 years of damage. GM’s real “legacy costs” are its long, bad history, and the loss of goodwill.
There’s another aspect to this situation.
When I was in high school, you could ask any guy what car he wanted to own. You’d get answers like…” ‘Vette,GTO, 442, SS396, Z28, Mach1, ‘Cuda, Challenger,” etc, etc.
We owned these cars when we could(GTO and Mustangs in my case). Outside of the Corvette or Mustang, what domestic car is in the minds of today’s young people? What car would keep them coming back for more?
We are now 2+ decades into accepting Japanese cars as part and parcel of American life. Many grew up never having owned or have driven a traditional US car. What’s there to go back for?
And yes, GM is a cog or two behind in it’s automatic transmissions, but again, not a technology problem, but a resource availability problem.
Yes, it’s very hard for a nonprofit organization to compete with one that made $10 billion the other year.
Toyota’s new engine block casting technique (Simple Slim) was introduced a couple of years back with the 3.5L V6. They managed to shave $1000 compared to the outgoing engine, then stuck the 3.5 and its variants (truck, DI, HSD) into an awful lot of vehicles, most interestingly the RAV4.
It doesn’t hurt that this 260hp+ powertrain is EPA rated slightly better than the competition, either.
Good point, Terry. My generation, Gen-Y, have grown up in a world where domestics were looked at as being inferior. I have owned American(Chevy) and Japanese (Honda and Subaru) cars. There is not question that, in my personal experience, the Japanese cars have proven themselves to be superior in quality and performance at their respective price points. I won’t be going back for anything short of a Corvette. Nothing else in the domestic portfolio, and that includes the entire 2.5, does anything for me. I think you would find that this is true amongst most of my peers. GM is in huge trouble when the Boomer generation begins to disappear, because even Hyundai is making cars on par, if not superior, to their current offerings. That’s a bad sign and can’t bode well for the future.
Such a good point, Terry. I own a little used/new CD store and thus am in the only business model that has a worse upside than Ford, GM or DCX. The same thing that you mention has happened in the record business: like those whose boy-racers have always been Japanese there is now a generation of kids who didn’t switch from CDs to digital, they were never anything but digital. I can not and will not ever get those people to shop in an old-fashioned record store, though God knows every one of them needs to. Whether they need to visit the Big 3’s showrooms is up to the companies and their products, I guess but it will be a hellish slog getting them to do it.
Tampa, many of the boomers that are left have already switched, and interestingly, our parents–those that fought against the Japanese in WWII–are now contently piloting Avalons, Maximas, etc.
My dad absolutely loves his Altima, as he did his Maxima before that. My mother loves her Mazda Protege, my mother-in-law is as happy with her 626 as she was with her Accord. What’s humorous is when she looks at people driving Town Cars and Sedan deVilles as…”Old People”(she’s 86!!)
80,000 Auras vs. 158,000 G6s, which are both essentially competing for the same pie. Based on the numbers above, the G6 ranges from 63000 to 105,000 units in retail sales. About half of what Honda and Toyota move in Accords and Camrys each year. Time to focus people.
Also, its great to say that you benchmarked cars like VW (for the Aura) and Audi (for the VE Commodore) but when the reviews come back and say that there are cheap plastics still to be found on the interior of your cars, there was obviously no follow through. All you really need to do is cut out the VW/Audi dash, hand it to your supplier and say I want this.
And, Toyota/Honda would have debut the Volt and said realisticly, these are the challenges and this is the time line to bring this car to market. Not, here’s our great idea that we want to bring out in three years (IF we can get a half a billion in subsidies for research).
Maybe if they actually made money selling cars, they could do their own R&D? Until GM steps up and really matches (or maybe even exceeds) its competition, they’re just blowing smoke.
Lichtronamo: based on prior history, if Toyota was “showing” the Volt, it would be within weeks or a few moths of production . The Prius was a total secret until it was announced and production ready.
BTW, GM showed the first of many electric vehicle concepts over the decades in 1964, the Electro-vair (Corvair based), with exotic silver-zinc batteries and 80 mile range (twice the Volt’s). I’m still waiting for mine.
What I haven’t seen anywhere is the lifespan expectancy for them.
And that is one of the main practical problems being worked out right now: how to make li-ion cells last 10 – 15 years in a hybrid vehicle.
Spin may not win, but perception counts.
And perception hasn’t really changed. If GM takes too long to get the Volt, or it’s production counterpart to market, then perception will only get worse, especially if Toyota steals the spotlight with being first to market with a plug-in hybrid. That’s assuming that the Volt or something similar makes it to market within a few years.
Pretty nice “GM-in-the-70’s” response from Toyota, blaming their customers for “lack of proper maintenance”,
First off, it’s not a recall. The recent announcement regarding the sludge issue is an extension of a policy Toyota already had in place that was meant to repair or replace sludged-up engines under warranty. And Toyota blaming the customer occured years ago. Right now, they certainly are not blaming the customer, by publicly announcing they will cover any and all sludge-related repair costs.
GM may be to be late to the hybrid party, but they are buying their Ni-MH batteries for the Vue Green Line from the Cobasys subsidiary of Energy Conversion Devices of Troy Michigan, which has been developing the technology as long as anyone.
Could have fooled me. I thought it was Japanese companies that were leaders in Ni-MH and Li-ion batteries, seeing as Ni-MH packs were in production in Japanese gasoline hybrid vehicles since the mid 90’s.
green light programs (like the Prius) that don’t make economic sense
Toyota green lighted the Prius program way back in the early 90s. At that time, such a car would have been laughed out of the market. Toyota had something called vision, long term vision more specifically that such a car in a decade would become popular and in-demand.
The Volt concept is a bit more than an act of desperation. It demonstrates that when the technology is ready and commercially viable, GM will have it on the road.
And it may be years before it’s viable. But in a few years nobody knows what the competition will have. Fact is, releasing such a far-off concept speaks nothing of bringing a vehicle on the road.
This deathwatch thing is getting old. Just downsize, invest in new technology, kick UAW ass and survive as a much smaller entity. There are enough people out there that’ll buy any piece of crap as long as it boasts a bowtie. GM can survive on that alone.
GM should engage Malcolm Bricklin to promote the Volt. He is a natural fit.
cheezeweggie:
They can’t do it. GM can’t afford the dealer lawsuits that would come from jettisoning its dead brands. It can’t afford a UAW strike. It can’t afford to spend whatever it takes to make the world’s best plug-in hybrid automobile. It can’t afford to advertise or market all its products.
Either the NA market will stabilize and their foreign markets will keep them afloat, or the NA market will sink the whole company, they’ll go bankrupt and, well, we’ll have to start a new series.
I kind of miss the days when concept cars were, well… concept cars. So what if the Volt is pie in the sky? I seem to recall GM promising us some 50 years ago that, by now, we would all be blasting along the interstate at 100 MPH while snoozing in the backseat. Just because it didn’t happen doesn’t mean I can’t look at the Firebird concepts and smile.
FWIW, I liked the Volt. If nothing else, it’s a far better looker than the Potato-on-wheels Prius.
RF:
You’re right on – GM can’t do the kind of downsizing necessary to compete because of their outdated labor model and franchise laws in individual states like a noose around their neck.
If they could revise their plan to a contemporary model, you’d have Chevrolet and Cadillac. There’s no need for the in-between brands anymore. Looks remarkably similar to Toyota/Lexus or Honda Acura.
Here’s what the Brits’ think of the Green sheen at the Detroit Auto Show (scroll half-way down the page):
http://www.sniffpetrol.com
Oh, excuse me NAIAS.
I sure have a hard time believing that Toyota is losing money on the Prius. If they can’t make money on hybrids, they why are they continuing to add more models every year. THis just doesn’t make sense. Must be a rumor that GM is spreading. GM lacks moral fiber IMO. THey will always try and cut corners and do the least possible acceptable job to get a product to market, in most cases. Their trucks are OK, but their cars just seem second rate.
As long as they have RecklessRick and the UAW making the calls, nothing much will change. They may avoid Chapter 11 due to China sales, but I kinda doubt it.
Petra,
There’s something to be said for a “Potato-on-wheels”
car, though I would not put a Prius into that category. It’s actually very difficult to design a sedan that is attractive without being showy. Maybe the rolling potatoes help remind us not to take car design too seriously.
“I sure have a hard time believing that Toyota is losing money on the Prius.”
Well, there’s two ways to count:
1) Take all the cost of material, third party bits and pieces, plus the cost of shipping them to the prius factory, add the cost of paying the people who put it together.
That is the cost of building on unit.
I’m willing to bet this cost is under the retail price of the Prius (say it costs $15,000 to build, at an average of $20,000 sold on the street, that’s $5,000 of gross margin to be spread between Toyota and its dealers — these numbers are made up)
2) Then the other way to count is to take the cost in point 1 and add the cost of building factories, amotizing material, research and development, marketing, acquiring other companies, etc… These are fixed cost that are independant of unit sales (they don’t go up if you sell more cars)
Using this method, and careful allocation of money spent by unit, it may be possible to tack more cost per unit on the Prius that it retails for.
That’s a dubious calculation in the first place: Toyota is spreading the cost of r&d over more models over time, easing the “cost per unit factor”, allocating some cost is difficult to do rationally (some cost incurred by a company has nothing to do with what they build, think supporting functions like HR and IT)
I have not seen any official numbers, but I would be surprised if toyota did lose any money with any unit sold. On the other hand, tehy may be spreading the word themselves, in an attempt to scare off the conpetitors: don’t get in the business, it does not make any money, however, we’ll licence our stuff to you (therefore reducing our cost :)
For example, Toyota’s new 5.7L V8 for the Tundra has great numbers. But it doesn’t outdistance GM’s 6L V8 by much.
Shame that GM’s 6.0L V8 is not ULEV-II rated.
And yes, GM is a cog or two behind in it’s automatic transmissions, but again, not a technology problem, but a resource availability problem.
Or four, if you count luxury divisions. Cadillac’s DTS has a whopping 4 speed automatic, while the Lexus ES has a 6 speed. Even worse is the “flagship” STS, which has either a 5 speed or 6 speed depending on which model you get. The Lexus LS has an 8 speed auto, along with many technologies and luxuries that STS owners can only dream about. Still say this is perception? I would say this is reality, not just perception.
As for GM and China, don’t forget GM’s 2006 results. Global GM sales in 2006 dropped compared with 2005 (by a small amount) despite the big gains in China. This proves that China alone cannot support any kind of sustainability for GM.
The many US government handouts to automobile companies for R&D have mostly been money poured down a drain. Another half billion, I sure hope not!
Companies are supposed to reinvest their profits in R&D, not get the rest of the taxpayers to foot the bills.
Where did all the windfall profits from the 1990s SUV boom go ?????
I suggest, “GM resurrection watch: part 1 ‘will they ever step out of the tomb’?”
Where did all the windfall profits from the 1990s SUV boom go ?????
Good question. Definitely not back in R&D.
You should ask the executives and the UAW.
“The Lexus LS has an 8 speed auto,”
I think GM should come out with a 22 speed automatic!
8 speed auto? How useless.
For electric cars to be viable and accepted, what is the magic number for range? Here is a full size Chevy truck that can do 150 miles per charge!
http://www.autobloggreen.com/2006/12/01/edta-conference-more-details-on-uqm-s-electric-silverado/
With a few more batteries, you can have any range you want.
Make it happen GM:
http://www.uqm.com/
Don’t be scared!
http://www.valence.com/SafetyVideo.asp
You should ask the executives and the UAW.
Actually you would want to ask the Shareholders (Class A) since the Shareholders own the company and the Executives are just employees.
8 speed auto? How useless.
I wonder how the transmission performs when cruising at 60 MPH and then applying full throttle. Thats a lot of ratios for the ECU to choose from. I wonder if it decides properly especially since Lexus has to concern itself with both 2007 EPA emissions control and fuel economy. Ill be waiting for the TTAC review of the LS460. I would go test drive one myself but I fear I would end up buying one.
Now that the majors have realized their strategy over the past ten years was a big mistake, it’s a question of whether they manage to swerve and turn around in time.
The Volt is a good proposal, but how long will it take GM to get it to market? Toyota’s manufacturing arm is able to outrun any other auto production line on the planet as far as time to market is concerned.
And as Rastus points out above, it’s not as if GM (and Ford) were able to see the opportunity Toyota saw, when the two majors were busy pulling their EVs out of the hands of satisfied customers back in 2000-2002.
Right now, Toyota has the resources required to go up on the biggest wave, crash into the surf and get back up again — while the other majors are trying to look good for a few seconds on waves that look big when photographed from the right angle. It’s no contest, really.
That said. I, and any other car lover, wants GM, Ford, Chrysler and the others in trouble to survive. To do so, they have to pare down their operations, listen to and anticipate customer needs and deliver to said. This they have not been able to.
Tried the Merc GL450 the other day. What a load of crap electronics posing as a utility car! And what a late entry unto the luxury UV field. And typical of how the majors are actually planning, stuck in their rut.
As to whether Toyota is making money on Prius – I don’t think so, yet. The combined Manhattan Project/Moonshot costs of developing Hybrid Synergy Drive on a forced timeline probably still has them in the red relative to how many units they have sold of either Prius or Lexus HSD vehicles. But that just proves the point above about being able to go for the biggest wave out there, confident you have the resources needed to keep hanging until the rest of the world catches up with you.
GM tries to exploit this “in the red” fact to create insecurity among potential buyers of HSD. That’s a PR tactic (just like their “anti-hybrid go for hydrogen” ads and PR a couple of years ago). When you don’t have product, you go for smoke and mirrors.
The commentator known as freddymac has been banned from commentating on this site.
He violated TTAC’s stated policy: no flaming the site, its authors or fellow commentators.
Anyone who does not respect the rules will not be allowed to participate in these discussions. Ever.
it`s typical for 2.5 to create one of the best concepts ever, and spread promises about high hopes for production, while the production vehicle is more down to earth in terms of quality, reliability and fit and finish. great concepts mean nothing to production, they just show the professionalism of the company, and in terms of concepts gm is really professional,. Volt is as great as chevrolet ss, or ;pontiac banshee, it doesn`t mean anything to production vehicles. Jeep has constantly pushed out concepts starting from 1989 wagoneer 4-door SUV, while in the production remained old leaf spring, live rear axle, 4speed auto mediocrities. concepts are show stoppers, vitamin injections in public, to trick their minds about companies potential. usually concepts are created to check the potential market, or to show a new trend, or approve company`s potential to build know-how. also concepts preceed production vehicles in order to create a buzz, and allure customers. in this case it is great that gm develops alternative energies, but they have the black spot in history- inability to manufacture impact electrical car, that was ahead of it`s time. will people trust a company that once recalled all the impacts and crashed them in a bailer? what matters, is when you go to dealers lot, what vehicles you can get there. and it is so sad that hydrogen technology was bought from toyota, not created by american companies themselves. less and less home run…….. by the way, this year gm showed the least amount of concepts in last 20 years. anyway, american concepts far exceed the design ideas of germans. what we need in an americam car is german attitude to details, and american perception of design. ( by the way where could I post my designs of cars for public discussion? i have a couple of concepts- Ruthenium sky(potential ford gr-2), zircone, ganymede and sporthatch ) jurisb lunatics@inbox.lv
Where did all the windfall profits from the 1990s SUV boom go ?
Although the numbers sounded big back then, the return on investment never came close to being sustainable. The problems that form the main theme of the GMDW (too many models, costly labor, “questionable” product decisions, management shell games, etc.) existed back then as well. GM salaried staffing in NA started falling in the mid-90’s.
Still say this is perception? I would say this is reality, not just perception.
I agree, it’s reality. But what value do 8 cogs provide over 5 or 6? Not having driven the LS460 I can’t answer that. But I wouldn’t be surprised if the answer is just to create perception of engineering superiority. Sometimes that works. Sometimes it doesn’t (re: BMW iDrive)
I have not seen any official numbers, but I would be surprised if toyota did lose any money with any unit sold.
Any manufacturer that expects to be around 20 years from now is investing in alternate energy technology. Whether they are developing it or buying/licensing it, the payback for those investments is still in the future for all of them. GM and Ford have the disadvantage of needing those investments to start paying off soon…
I used to live in DC. I don’t know how Brown ever got a job at the Post. Well, maybe the standards there aren’t what they like their readers to think they are. Brown’s reviews were always soooooooooooooooooooo boring. Once he wrote an article in the Wash Post Magazine claiming that American cars were better quality than Japanese cars. Several readers (including me) sent LTEs trouncing his lack of logic. I’d say more, but my girlfriend is on my case to get out the door for a Sunday road trip.
Continue to hate GM and those who do not agree with you.
Do not let GM, DCX or Ford believe they have a chance in hell. It will only drive them harder to be better.
Let Toyota believe they they are infallible and survive on reputation alone.
533,000 recalls by mid January is “ok” it’s just a fluke right? Let Toyota Throw a hail marry pass on a product (Tundra) that alienates their core marketing audience. Let Toyota believe they understand the Midwest dominated large truck segment.
Toyota sounds like the big 3 of 1976.
There was some recent 2005/2006 recall info on Autoblog:
GM = 5.0m/1.4m
Ford = 6.0m/1.7m
Toyota = 1.2m/0.8m
Honda = no 2005 data/1.2m (all but 1,397 vehicles due to a printing error in the owners manual)
Nissan = 0.7m/1.3m
It appears that Toyota and Honda are doing better than just living on their (well deserved) reputations.
I dont hate GM. GM didnt beat me up, take my lunch money, or call my parents names.
GM, DCX, and Ford have had had chances upon chances to right themselves, but they seem intent on snatching failure from the jaws of victory.
The Big 2.5 survived for years on their reputation, why not others?
Let Toyota? It’s their company, they can do whatever they want, and if they too make bad decisions, they’ll suffer just like the Big 2.5
I may not agree with you..but I for sure dont hate you.
8 speed auto? How useless.
Considering the new LS gets class leading fuel economy (19/27 EPA for the short wheelbase, and 18/27 EPA for the long wheelbase model) I’d say it does provide some use.
I wonder how the transmission performs when cruising at 60 MPH and then applying full throttle. Thats a lot of ratios for the ECU to choose from. I wonder if it decides properly especially since Lexus has to concern itself with both 2007 EPA emissions control and fuel economy. Ill be waiting for the TTAC review of the LS460. I would go test drive one myself but I fear I would end up buying one.
The transmission can “jump” several gears depending on the situation.
That said. I, and any other car lover, wants GM, Ford, Chrysler and the others in trouble to survive. To do so, they have to pare down their operations, listen to and anticipate customer needs and deliver to said. This they have not been able to.
Competition is always good. Competition results in better products, and a good situation for consumers.
A few randon thoughts…
Captain Tungsten wrote, “The Volt concept is a bit more than an act of desperation. It demonstrates that when the technology is ready and commercially viable, GM will have it on the road. Let’s haul that goal back into the street…..it’s “game ON”! ”
How different Toyota and Honda are. They don’t wait for the technology to be ready and commercially available, they MAKE it ready and commercially viable. In fact, the Japanese – and other countries – are doing that across a lot of sectors. They work hard to get out in front.
The new 2nd generation Highlander is just weeks away
If it’s a 2008, I’m expecting it will be in dealer showrooms – or passing quickly through them – in April or so. Toyota sure moves quickly on these things.
Finally, there’s a row of Aura’s at the local Saturn dealership. While style and looks are generally a matter of taste, certain details aren’t – they reflect a standard. The Aura, regardless of car color, has an black rubber-coated antenna stuck top center over the windshield. Even if you think the Aura is otherwise beautiful, this is like a zit on a supermodel. What would it have taken to move the antenna to above the rear window and color-match it to the car? I’m pretty sure even the base Accord gets that level of treatment.
The only people that have the silly notion that “Toyota is infallible” ironically are import critics or Toyota bashers.
And why let facts get in your way, when it’s so easy to give in to the temptation of envy and bash Toyota?
If it’s a 2008, I’m expecting it will be in dealer showrooms – or passing quickly through them – in April or so. Toyota sure moves quickly on these things.
Actually, rumours are saying it might even come out in the second half of this year.
The increase in recalls for Toyota is alarming to say the least and have been getting more frequent since 2003 (2.2 million in 04) and if you choose to ignore this fact than it’s your own predisposition.
The fact is Toyota is getting larger. More cars, more parts, more problems. Every car manufacturer faces this challenge when the amount of vehicles sold world wide jumps exponentially. If you think for one second that any one manufacturer is immune to this then you are in denial.
When was the last time recalls made people run away from a brand? Even the Ford Explorer + Firestone tread separation debacle wasn’t enough to knock Explorer off the top of the sales perch.
Toyotas will have to kill far more people by defects than Explorers did to have any sales impact. If you like the car, a recall for something relatively minor (compared with the one above) isn’t going to prevent you from buying another.
It’s agreed that Brown’s anaysis is not really representative of GM’s true position. However, as far as I can tell the GM death watch series is also a bit out of focus and on the other end of the spectrum to Brown. Brown makes mention of all the positive while Farago points out all the negative. You have to look a both. The truth is somewhere in between.
The Aura sales may be disapopinting but it’s a little early to say that it “is getting slaughtered.” How many have they produced? What is the inventory level of this vehicle? Do you really think they will sustain those sales levels on a newly launched vehicle? There is always a ramp up period to a completely new vehicle launch. Time will tell. Being selected as the new car of the year and the Silverado grabbing the new truck of the year is a nice achievement.
I commend GM on showing the Volt and sticking out their neck. The consequences of not bringing this vehicle to market should be a great motivator for them.
As well, I read a lot of people who say they have had bad experiences with GM vehicles and wanted to share past vehicle experience. I have owned a Toyota, an Audi and currently drive a GM with about 160K on it which I bought new. The only trouble I have had was from the Audi and it was constant. The GM has been extremely good to date.
What is the inventory level of this vehicle?
The inventory (or days on the lot) for the Aura is higher than it is for the Camry. In terms of production numbers, these two cars are at opposite sides of the spectrum, so it can only mean one thing: consumer demand for the Aura is not that great.
GM can get plenty of publicity for their prime models (Silverado, Corvette, Impala, Cobalt).
The problem with vehicles like the Aura is that the lack of brand and name cache results in it literally getting drowned out with everything else that’s out there. Historically speaking, even if a vehicle had certain outstanding qualities in this segment (Millenia, Diamante) it’s very hard to convert because the brand has been used for so many economical vehicles.
The Aura is still a good launch. GM did a better job of it then Hyundai with their XG300/XG350 and even better than Honda with the Acura Vigor.
However, the only way you can put this type of vehicle on the map is if you launched it with an assortment of other models for the same brand that would give it a more upscale image. Bringing the Opel Astra, and perhaps a Euro- styled minivan (in place of the Vue) along with the Aura would have really opened a lot of folk’s eyes to the Saturn division. It would have also been easier folks to identify Saturn as a ‘European import’ division and would have even hindered GM’s efforts to neuter the Aura’s interior.
On a side note, what do you guys think of taking the ‘bowtie’ for Chevy’s cars and turning them into lightning bolts a la the Opel brand. I think it would be a nice way of distinguishing the cars from the trucks and may even encourage GM to go for a more sporty and exciting line-up in North America.
Just a thought…
Event Horizon:
It’s agreed that Brown’s anaysis is not really representative of GM’s true position. However, as far as I can tell the GM death watch series is also a bit out of focus and on the other end of the spectrum to Brown. Brown makes mention of all the positive while Farago points out all the negative. You have to look a both. The truth is somewhere in between.
Having read Brown for years in the Wash Post, I can tell you he’s full of sh… of hogwash. I’m guessing they keep him there because they don’t care about cars. For example, they got rid of an excellent Brock Yates column in the ’80s. While I haven’t been very impressed with Yates of late, the columns he had in the Wash Post Magazine up until about 20 years ago were quite superb. If I were at home right now, I’d try to dig up the terrible article on why American cars are better (in his twisted logic) than Japanese cars, and my letter to the editor, but I’m not. One thing I remember is that he cited a Honda recall for some really trivial thing as evidence of inferiority.
RF may or may not be correct that GM is on its way out, but I think he is intellectually honest, and has a much better grasp of the details than most people. I doubt Brown has one fiftieth the in depth knowldge of GM’s condition that RF has.
One of the best things a car journalist can do is what RF is doing: pointing out the serious faults of the big 2.5. If the big 2.5 could take this as constructive criticism, they might be able to do something about the problem (well, I doubt it; I think their bureaucracies are impossibly sclerotic, but I’d love to be proven wrong, and I’d love to see the Camaro come out as beautiful as the concept, and I’d love to see some goo quality come out of my country’s car companies… but I fear I’m dreaming…
macarose:
You are right on target. The bowtie on the cars could be retired. I’m not sure that a lightning bolt is the answer though. Losing the bowtie would not necessarily be change for the sake of change. More importantly, the brassy, sharp-angled bowtie simply lacks refinement and draws too much attention away from whatever aesthetic improvements Chevy may make on the rest of their exteriors. The Ford blue oval is more muted and classier.
“…and even better than Honda with the Acura Vigor.” Not exactly a current comparision?! Honda appears to have learned from their mistakes 10 years ago, however with the most recent TL.
The problem with the Saturn Aura launch is GM doesn’t have enough dough to properly market all of its brands and the products within each brand vs. Toyota/Honda which typically have one brand/product in each segment.
Recall numbers should probably be reported as a percentage of total sales. If the absolute number of GM recalls is increasing while sales are declining, I’d say they have a problem.
Personally I think concepts are meaningless. Its so rare that the production model actually resembles the concept that they’re basically a waste of time. I remember seeing a V16 caddy concept at the LA autoshow a few years ago…
As for the Volt: if Tesla brought an entirely electric car from dream to reality in 3 years, I don’t see what’s particularly amazing about GM’s attempt.
(am I the only one who doesn’t like the Aura’s design?)
Event Horizon:
Brown makes mention of all the positive while Farago points out all the negative. You have to look a both. The truth is somewhere in between.
As you might have noticed, I’m not a big fan of this shades of gray stuff. Yes, sometimes things are not as bad as they seem. But sometimes they are.
As the son of a Holocaust survivor, I can tell you for a fact that the truth is NOT always in between the optimistic POV and the pessimistic perspective . Sometimes things ARE as dark as they seem. Sometimes, they’re even darker.
For example, I’d really like to know what’s going on with the SEC investigations of GM’s accounting practices. We haven’t heard a peep in over six months. Perhaps it’s nothing.
But I do believe that it is the press’ job to be a watchdog, not a DC-powered lapdog. If only for the press’ mental health. As Benjamin Franklin said, it is better to be a pessimist and pleasantly surprised than it is to be a GM shareholder and constantly disappointed. Or something like that.
macarose:
It would have also been easier folks to identify Saturn as a ‘European import’ division and would have even hindered GM’s efforts to neuter the Aura’s interior.
Am I the only one who finds it deeply, tragically ironic (Warren’s word) that the brand born as “GM’s import fighter” now depends on imports for its survival? GM supporters, America first folk, where are your loyalties now.
Ah, Warren Brown, Mr. Righteous himself (he uses that word a lot in his columns as I recall).
And what is his fixation with sex and libido? Yeah, we car guys know sex and cars have a definite relationship, but does he have to mention this in just about every blasted review? Maybe he’s compensating for repressing “impure thoughts” during his formative years at those parochial grade schools in his native Big Easy?
That was my thought precisely regarding Saturn, “A different kind of car, a different kind of company”.
Saturn was created as a company within a company. They had their own dedicated facility (Spring Hill TN), and as they loved to tout, they had their own way of doing things…Better(!) ways of doing things (in comparison to the old GM ways).
And yep, now they are dependent upon Kaiserslautern:
http://www.opel.de/meetopel/opelag/location/kaiserslautern/content.act;jsessionid=FnGQPRp60cnCHDWCSNlCZbCmn5hKNST5KJDVcJrVxJXHtPcndbbq!-19362353!NONE
It’s a shame in a way, because it is a complete and total admission that GM cannot build a world-class small car in NA. Period.
Yet others do it quite well: Honda, Nissan, Toyota, Hyundai, soon Kia. Most of them are within spitting distance of Spring Hill proper.
Their way of business is a complete failure. It’s structural and it’s organizational. Thank the good Lord above the “fringe” elements (Daewoo, Opel, Holden) are their to prop up the Master. The Master has osteoporosis and can barely walk nowadays, while all the whipper-snappers are out playing basketball.
…and as an individual who has been to and seen Dachau, I….I don’t know, yes…things really CAN be quite ugly!
I wish GM had the instinct of a “survivor”…but I don’t see it.
Maybe one day in the not-too-distant future they will hold tours of GM’s old production facilities, where one can buy a mock “UAW” t-shirt or ball cap.
“Even if you think the Aura is otherwise beautiful, this is like a zit on a supermodel. What would it have taken to move the antenna to above the rear window and color-match it to the car? I’m pretty sure even the base Accord gets that level of treatment. ”
Thats the OnStar antenna. And I’m pretty sure you can’t get that on any Honda.
I want to believe that GM is making strides to get better but I have not seen proof. I’m not one to think that any vehicle is perfect. I am reasonable enough to accept some defects. It’s just the nature of many suppliers. Who on earth could expect perfection from so many parts. On the other hand … All my issues with GM come mainly from numerous dealership experiences. Repeat attempts to repair simple defects comes to my mind. I don’t know if GM can outrun the dealer problems. They don’t seem to have much control over how the dealers treat the customer. I actually loath having to go to a GM dealer … Don’t you?
IAMVince wrote, “Thats the OnStar antenna. And I’m pretty sure you can’t get that on any Honda.”
You miss the point. You can get satellite services in a Honda. You just don’t have to put up with a zit on your Honda’s forehead when you get satellite. The antenna’s in the back and it’s color-matched to the car. It’s much less obtrusive. You get a similar good-looking arrangement on other vehicles.
What would it have cost GM to NOT mar the car’s looks this way? Isn’t the XR supposed to be Saturn’s premium vehicle?
CliffG: The essential point is that making an Audi like interior is a reasonable goal, Yes, make an interior that looks great in the showroom but looks like complete crap inside of 5 years. That will help resale.
z31:
The idea that GM interiors are better than Audi’s because they last longer is just plain wrong.
In the main, Audi interiors hold-up extremely well to long-term use.
Robert Farago:
The idea that GM interiors are better than Audi’s because they last longer is just plain wrong.
I’m not saying GM interiors are better than audi, I’m saying Audi is not the benchmark they should reach for (materials-wise).
I’d prefer the interior materials of a honda to an audi, because I know I’m not going to have chunks of soft-touch stuff peeling off in a few years.
Interesting review of state of hybrid and battery technology as pieced together by some industry analysts
http://yahoo.businessweek.com/globalbiz/content/jan2007/gb20070119_906171.htm
I expect to see the Chevrolet Volt at Williams Chevrolet locally, at about the same time I expect to see a brand new 1963 Chrysler Turbine car available at Bill Marsh Chrysler.
Now, if the General Messup would spend more money, time and effort on developing and manufacturing genuine product improvements instead of smoke and mirrors, I might have a tad of respect for it.
Interesting, isn’t it, that Toyota didn’t hype the hell out of the Prius for years before it’s surprise announcement in 1996 or 1997, in Japan. They quietly and competently engineered a break-through car, then brought it to market.
Jeesh, what a novel idea. Toyota didn’t go begging from the Japanese government for monies to develop the car, either. Wow, what another novel idea.
Interestingly, GM (and Ford and Chrysler) had no compunction about accepting tons of money from the Clinton administration while trying, and failing, to develop an 80 MPG “supercar” (hybrid).
What was I read the other day? GM’s value is 8% of Toyota’s value, as a corporation? Wow.
Results count, right? Right.
Just to play devil’s advocate for a moment, all the talk about paring GM down to Cadillac and Chevrolet has me thinking…
Is this a ploy to allay the frustrations of those irked by GM’s continued existence as “world’s largest” whereby a “right-sized” GM on the Acura/Honda etc. model would shed market share like mad and thus reflect GM’s true level of market support?
I ponder this as well because I’ve also heard the “well, if you combine all W-body sales they outsell the Camry” arguments.
I’m certainly aware of the reasonable arguments about GM’s resouces being stretched too thin and this Caddy/Chev model fixing that, but…
I talked to a journo who was on teh COTY jury, who said he picked the Aura because it was “a really good effort by GM.” When I asked if the Aura is better than the Camry, he said, “Hell, no. The Camry is a way better car, but the Aura does more for GM than Camry does for Toyota.”
Ummm, not sure I follow that logic, 450,000 sales versus 80,000 doesn’t seem to work for me. Plus, with an Opel-based Euro-cost bassis to work from, seems kinda hard for the Aura to be a profitable vehicle line.
If the Volt makes production, I will lick the battery terminals myself. While GM whines about Toyota’s subsidies from MITI and yen manipulation, what about the $1.5 billion GM got for the Car of Tomorrow that netted zero, much less the $500 million EV subsidy that GM is begging for now? The hypocrisy is ridiculous.
Is it me or does anyone else think that China is going to go badly for the automakers? It seems like the 2.5 are banking on huge numbers there long term to keep them afloat.
I just have a really bad feeling about the “49% partnerships” that they have in China. Other articles here and elsewhere have alluded to these requirements essentially creating a big training program for Chinese engineers and machinists and that 100% chinese auto companies were starting to hire away the new Chinese expertise and producing direct copies of the “Partnership” products at a lower cost.
Or the Chinese government could just say why bother and privatize them all. Don’t think that would happen? Me either, but Chavez is successfully doing that if you have been paying attention to the news. And I’m sure that lots of those businessmen were certain it wouldn’t happen in Venezuala either.
What happens when the 2.5’s investment in China is “nationalized”? All 3 will be bankrupt YESTERDAY.
86er:
January 22nd, 2007 at 2:11 pm
I ponder this as well because I’ve also heard the “well, if you combine all W-body sales they outsell the Camry” arguments.
I wonder about this for a different reason. Since GM has many more brands than Toyota or Honda they can make more “flavors” of a car. We call it badge engineering in a dismissive way but I have wondered if the problem isn’t the badge engineering itself but the execution of it. If it is done well then the different cars hit their target markets and fulfill the needs of customers then sales are made. I think I really mean platform sharing becuase if you really try to diferentiat the car to appeal to different groups then you are going to have real differences in the vehicles. Maybe badge engineering is lazy mans way of doing platform sharing.
Now look at Toyota. They have the Camary and it’s a huge seller. But because Toyota is one line of cars they have to make it appeal to as large a demographic as possible. How many time have people here at TTAC complained that the Camary is an appliance, it’s souless, it’s boring? Toyota doesn’t have an “ecitement” division to let thier desingers take the Camary platform and really let loose with it style wise. So I think this could be a strength for GM if they were not so strapped for cash, their attempts at differentiating product so inept, and their various divisions so unfocussed (with the notable exception of Cadillac). It can also lead to a lot of vehicle sales. For quite a few years GM has sold more large pickup trucks than Ford but they are split between Chevy and GMC so Ford gets to advertise they are the biggest seller.
TheTruthHurts:
January 22nd, 2007 at 3:18 pm
I talked to a journo who was on teh COTY jury, who said he picked the Aura because it was “a really good effort by GM.” When I asked if the Aura is better than the Camry, he said, “Hell, no. The Camry is a way better car, but the Aura does more for GM than Camry does for Toyota.”
You have to understand that COTY awards are not always based on who has the best product. Most of the time it’s about who has the most significant NEW product. And the Aura fits this criteria. When you talk about something like C&D’s Ten Best list then you are talking about who has the best in class. That’s why those kinds of lists have had the CamCord and BMW 3 series many times.
Windswords:
So I think this could be a strength for GM if they were not so strapped for cash, their attempts at differentiating product so inept, and their various divisions so unfocussed (with the notable exception of Cadillac). It can also lead to a lot of vehicle sales.
A lot of vehicle sales like in the good ol’ days.
It didn’t use to be this way. The ladder from Chev to Cadillac is broken. And I don’t think it’s all because of the Japanese invasion and socio-economic realities.
I keep hearing folks say that “squandered goodwill” and “quality perception” is what has iredeemably broken GM and American car sales. If that’s true, that it’s all public perception stopping people from buying their stuff, that’s actually good news.
People are fickle. They have short memories and love to spend money to look and be cool. American cars are absolutely not in vogue (except maybe the mustang), but I almost bet they’d do better with $500mil in iPod quality advertising then attempting to play technology catchup.
Remember we are a country that allows convicted rapists & wife abusers (Mike Tyson & James Brown), and child molestors (various clergyman) to return to positions of power and celebrity.
My family owned an Oldsmobile in the mid 80s that broke down so amazingly often, we had to sell it within 6months. I personally would never buy another american car, but as more younger impressionable people with MTV-length memories come to market, I think spin, & perception manipulation can go a long long way.
This article points to what I feel are the continuing attitudes at GM and the problems they cause.
The Volt is another in a long line of concepts that point to “wow wee” technology with very little chance of seeing production. The only reason I can think of that these concepts are shown is to distract the people from the inferior product they’ve continued to assemble all this time and to show themselves as a “high tech” company. They are marketing spin that take away badly needed resources from their products.
The Aura is another example of how GM half-asses everything they make. There is no four cylinder, six speed automatic available. This in a segment where fully 70% of the market sold (yes, the Camry and Accord ) are FOUR CYLINDER VEHICLES. It goes without saying that GM needs to develop a four cylinder engine on the par of a Honda for smoothness, power, and economy. They also lost an opportunity with the Aura to leapfrog the competition and offer a wagon version and a Diesel version at intro.
And if the General wants to change the perception of their cars, then they should do a few more things:
Offer a TRUE 10 year, 100,000 BUMPER-TO-BUMPER waranty.
Make sure dealers not only honor the waranty, but perform waranty service quickly and CORRECTLY without inconveniencing the customer.
Race, and I don’t mean NASCAR. GM should take their mainstream cars and race them in the World Rally Championship and various touring car series world-wide. While the publicity would be neglible in the US at first, success at that level of competition would get back to the enthusiast community here in the States – a community that is VERY influential when it comes to how a company is viewed in the marketplace. Just ask Subaru about the WRX and Mitsubishi about the EVO and their effect on the rest of their product lines.
Do anything they can to increase the resale value of their cars. While part of that will automatically happen if they offer a great waranty and make better cars, GM can do a lot more. GM can offer guranteed resale value on a GM car if it is traded in on another GM car. GM can also subsidise lease residuals instead of discounting prices. Admittedly, this falls under marketing, but it would also go a long way to changing perceptions in the market.
If the cars are as good as GM and its supporters claim they are, these are no-brainers to survival.
Why I disagree with about 75% of what you say, and I think it is because of your negatism, just like 90% of the critics out there that have their head so far up Toyota they do not know any better. Selling 80k of the Aura would be a success with the small dealer network. They also have to change peoples mind of what a Saturn is which is no small task, but the sales will only go up.
Also, I would like to see the facts on your rental fleet numbers. They sold 70k less cars to rental fleets this year, not very much considering GM sells 4 million cars in the US, but they make very little money and hurt the image of them, but it also helps pay the bills of the UAW workers that would be sitting in the jobs bank if they shut down a shift. It isnt as easy as stop selling, they would look good to your narrow mind, but would loose a ton paying employees that would be doing nothing.
Selling 80k of the Aura would be a success with the small dealer network. They also have to change peoples mind of what a Saturn is which is no small task, but the sales will only go up.
So you don’t feel that the lack of a four cylinder model in this segment hurts sales?
And wouldn’t offering a unique body style in this segment along with an alternative to a hybrid that got the same or better mileage, go a long way to changing the way people think of Saturn?
I would say the 4 banger and hybrid will help sales tremendously, but 80k with out that is very good, especially for a $25,000 saturn.
Changing peoples mind of what a Saturn is, most people think of it as a plastic vanilla car. Not something that has good driving dynamics or a little pep.
Unique styling is a matter of opinion. Aura is nothing special, but look at the best selling vehicles, F-150 and Camry, they both are boring as hell, so styling doesnt go as far as everyone says it does, unless it is ugly like the Aztek.
I would say the 4 banger and hybrid will help sales tremendously, but 80k with out that is very good, especially for a $25,000 saturn.
Changing peoples mind of what a Saturn is, most people think of it as a plastic vanilla car. Not something that has good driving dynamics or a little pep.
The Aura platform has been out since 2003. Why do we need to wait so long to get these other powertrains?
80K in Aura sales are pretty good for a start, but what about sales that are lost, never to be regained, of those that were shopping for a four cylinder (70% of the Aura’s market)? In my opinion, the Aura is just another example of GM dropping the ball.
I like the Aura’s looks. Anything in this segment that looks distinctive has to be a plus. But I really don’t think that there is an issue with the looks of the Aura as much as the other factors I mentioned.
I feel that Saturn had an opportunity with the Aura to position itself in a unique way in the marketplace if it offered the wagon body and the Euro Diesel since its inception. Both those things would’ve placed Saturn as a “must look at” in many buyers’ minds and as such would’ve done much to change perceptions. Instead, the Aura is unfortunately starting to be saddled as being just another badge engineered platform mate of the Pontiac G6.
I honestly do not know why it takes GM 1 year after a car is debut to get all the powertrain choices, even though the same basic car is a couple years old. I can see it on the Hybrid because it is not in anything else, but the 4 banger, there is no excuse.
If they built a wagon, that would be a very nitch market, not many people buy wagons, but I also see how it would be a great idea to, be the first, try it out.
Diesles are great, but with the price of fuel $.50 more and every company charging a huge premium for the option it is not worth it yet. Also, GM uses the excuse it cost to much to bring the diesle from Europe to the US and meet emission standards but Chrysler is doing it in with the Jeep and so is Mercedes. Once again GM will 3 behind, instead of 3 years ahead.
86er:
A lot of vehicle sales like in the good ol’ days.
It didn’t use to be this way. The ladder from Chev to Cadillac is broken.
It still can produce a lot of vehicle sales. I agree that the ladder is broken. Question is can it be fixed and what would it look like? GM had 5 divisions in the good old days. It could probably do with three now plus a foreign owned subsidiary (like Saab) or partner. If Chevy is the bottom and Caddy the top then all you need is a middle tier. A lot of people think that should be Saturn. Some think it should be Buick. Others Pontiac. Irregardless if you get the branding right maybe not one of them will have a car that outsells Camry but all three toghether might. Problem is as RF has said none of this can happen with the current franchise laws in place.
I honestly do not know why it takes GM 1 year after a car is debut to get all the powertrain choices, even though the same basic car is a couple years old. I can see it on the Hybrid because it is not in anything else, but the 4 banger, there is no excuse.
If they built a wagon, that would be a very nitch market, not many people buy wagons, but I also see how it would be a great idea to, be the first, try it out.
Diesles are great, but with the price of fuel $.50 more and every company charging a huge premium for the option it is not worth it yet. Also, GM uses the excuse it cost to much to bring the diesle from Europe to the US and meet emission standards but Chrysler is doing it in with the Jeep and so is Mercedes. Once again GM will 3 behind, instead of 3 years ahead.
In my opinion, it is these very issues as to why many customers see GM as hopelessly behind many of the foreign competition. Waiting for GM to install more desirable powertrains in its cars, partly contributes to the lousy resale value of the first few years version of those cars and eventually drags down the value of the whole line.
Selling a wagon and a Diesel version of the Aura could be considered a risk, but it is a calculated risk that could give fantastic results. As of now, there is only ONE wagon being sold in the mid-priced, mid-sized, segment and that is the Mazda6. Mazda is also the only one that sells a 5 door hatchback in this segment ( now that the Malibu Maxx is gone). I can’t quote you sales figures, but I have to feel that those two cars represent extra sales to Mazda.
GM needs a few “hits”. Selling a wagon version of the Aura, considering that it already EXISTS, is something worth trying.
Oops. I inadvertently deleted a pro-GM comment from this thread. It was double posted and I deleted the wrong one, then deleted the other one and sent an email asking him to put it back up and that bounced. Anyway,sorry about that. Here it is. What a bunch of nonsense. You that think GM is going down the Sh*tter might want to read some basic facts. Here are a few: * At 4.97 million vehicles, 2006 sales outside of the United States accounted for about 55 percent of GM’s total global sales, growing at close to 7 percent compared with 2005, outpacing the industry average growth rate of 6 percent. The industry has seen a 10 million vehicle increase in the global automotive market in the past five years, and the market now tops 67 million. * In the Asia/Pacific region, GM sales of 1.26 million vehicles topped 1 million vehicles for the second consecutive year, and GM China saw more than 32 percent sales growth compared with 2005, outpacing the country’s industry growth rate of 26 percent. GM was the top-selling automaker in China in 2006, with 877,000 vehicles sold. For the first time, GM sold more Buicks in China (304,000) than in the United States (241,000). * In the Latin America, Africa and Middle East region, GM sales reached an all-time record 1.03 million vehicles, exceeding 1 million vehicles for the first time, up 17 percent in volume compared with 2005. Truck sales were up 21 percent and car sales were up 16 percent. GM saw volume increases in 10 of 11 major Latin America, Africa and Middle East markets in 2006. GM do Brazil set an all-time domestic sales record with 410,000 vehicles delivered. * In Europe, GM sales – for the first time – exceeded 2 million vehicles, up about 1 percent. Growth in Eastern Europe, up 59 percent, led the increase. Cadillac, Corvette, HUMMER, Saab and Chevrolet set European sales records for their brands. Chevrolet achieved record sales of more than 340,000 vehicles, up 15 percent. Saab sold more than 90,000 vehicles, beating its previous European sales record of 82,000 sold in 2005. In other words, GM (read again) the best selling brand in the world’s biggest country with the world’s fastest growing middle class with a desire and appetite for what? Buicks. Yes- Buicks are considered hip and cool there believe it or not, and they sell well, right along with rebadged Chevrolets. As far as their NA models, I applaud them on those that I have seen, including a full size truck that gets better fuel economy than that ugly turd of a tundra toyota is releasing, and they have a decent family car too. I rented a Malibu on a trip 3 months ago and honestly it handled really well and got over 30MPG. Impressive for a car with a peppy engine. I would possibly consider a Malibu myself once they hit the showrooms…. and this coming from someone that has owned toyotas for 20 years.
Not to rain on the parade I almost cancelled, all the above tells us is that GM's doing well abroad and crap at home. Will GM NA drag down the mothership? Barring immediate market stabilization, yes.
Robert Farago:
January 23rd, 2007 at 9:19 pm
Not to rain on the parade I almost cancelled, all the above tells us is that GM’s doing well abroad and crap at home.
Will GM NA drag down the mothership? Barring immediate market stabilization, yes.
You know I didn’t really think things were that bad until I recently read the following Freep article:
http://www.freep.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20070122/BUSINESS01/701220320/1014
Scroll down to the bottom for the breakdown of retail sales vs. total.
Far be it for me to point out, but look at the plummeting GM retail vs. rising Toyota retail.
I uttered a lengthy string of expletives that I will not bother to repeat here. You better not be right, Farago. I can’t go out and buy GM vehicles until they return to profitability.
I can’t go out and buy GM vehicles until they return to profitability.
What does it matter if a company is making money or not if you are going to buy their vehicles. Even if, and this is a big if, GM goes bankrupt, they are not going anywhere, all their warranties will be honored and everything. So I do not understand what that has to do with anything.
@ tones03:
Relax, I was merely being my old facetious self.
86er
Take another look at the chart in the freep article.
For the year GMs drop in market share is roughly the same with or without fleet sales. But for the 4th quarter, market share for retail sales was up almost 1%, and down .1% when fleet sales are included. Just as GM has been promising, the trend is away from fleet and toward retail.
willjames2000:
January 24th, 2007 at 12:53 pm
86er
Take another look at the chart in the freep article.
For the year GMs drop in market share is roughly the same with or without fleet sales. But for the 4th quarter, market share for retail sales was up almost 1%, and down .1% when fleet sales are included. Just as GM has been promising, the trend is away from fleet and toward retail.
Good. Here’s hoping that chart is indicative of GM bottoming out and rebounding for ’07, as per 4th Q results.
KixStart started by observing, “The Aura, regardless of car color, has an black rubber-coated antenna stuck top center over the windshield…this is like a zit on a supermodel…”
IAMVince wrote, “Thats the OnStar antenna. And I’m pretty sure you can’t get that on any Honda.”
KixStart responded, “You miss the point. You can get satellite services in a Honda. You just don’t have to put up with a zit on your Honda’s forehead when you get satellite.”
Hahahaha, that was the funniest interchange I’ve witnessed all week! And I’m with KixStart on this. Small things DO matter!
I haven’t seen much written about the GM10 program and the disastrous effect that had on GM. Remember, this was GMs plan to replace the rear drive Cutlass, the Grand Prix, and some other models with front wheel drive cars? I can’t remember the exact figures, but after they were launched, weren’t the sales of the new vehicles something like 20% of the old models? To me, that always seemed like GMs all time worst blunder.