So GM wants to "spark a broader, global discussion" about the issues bedeviling The General. GMNext is their answer to the question how do we accept questions without [necessarily] providing answers? I'm no web designer (cough), but I like the look of the thing, and hey, it IS open source. Others in the biz aren't so sure. This from commentator filbrand on Slashdot: "The site is ugly. It looks like the marketing guys got into the buzz of Web 2.0 and told their Windows programmers that they wanted that for their site. The result? A .NET site with WordPress knee-jerked inside. The site (as most of .NET crap) doesn't even validate [w3.org]. Even the blog, based on WordPress, must have been so messed up that it doesn't validate [w3.org] either. And what an awful theme! Where do these guys get their webdesigners from? Although I think they still have a lot to learn about using open source, I have to applaud at least their try. Although it's one step back, it's two forward. :-)." TTAC's best and brightest, what say you?
Find Reviews by Make:
Read all comments
I checked it out. I like the design/functionality of the site although I’m no web design aficionado, but what caught me was the lack of a clear mission statement. There is the little blurb from Lutz talking about the move from the Fastlane blog to this to get their message out but why can you not ascertain the site’s purpose within seconds of visiting? Further, I don’t like the idea of giving my thoughts to GM for free, but I guess I can see how customers might like a channel for voicing thoughts/concerns. And that huge “Green” logo that pops onto the screen with leaves flowing behind it made me laugh.
The most useful page by far is this one
http://www.gmnext.com/FAQ.aspx
Other than that it seems they wanted a little bit of everything.
I like the format, clear and honest. Way more appealing than Ford’s Bold Moves site.
http://www.gmnext.com/Stories.aspx
They even profiled SAE engineering students’ efforts on the Challenge X Equinox, that’s definitely not the work of conventional PR wisdom. This has always been one of GM’s strong points, supporting engineering students while the rest of the car biz does much of nothing.
I don’t know how this helps GM solve their multitude of financial problems, but its certainly a step in the right direction.
I wish GM the best of luck with this site.
The proof will be in the pudding. Anyone can put up a “web 2.0” looking site (rounded corners! podcasts! RSS feeds!)
But…
* Will the blog posts address real, substantive issues? Will employees have to go thru 20 layers of approval before a post is allowed? (ie, the same corporate thought process that brought us the Aztek.)
* Will the comments remain open and free of censorship (within reason), or is this going to be tightly regulated by the PR and legal departments at GM? If so, the site is next to useless.
* Will they link out to blogs talking about GM — even sites that are critical (a la TTAC)? Posting stories with trackbacks might actually show that someone inside the Tubes understands what a two-way conversation is all about.
I browsed all through it and didn’t notice anything quirky or unusual. Just seemed like another site, nothing different.
Oh dear. The GM Next site is bad. A little heavy on the technowizardry and a little light on the commentary/conversation.
If the basic purpose is to deliver the, “pity us, we don’t know what to do next,” message then they have a qualified success.
However, if the desire is to have a structured conversation with real consumers, GM is going to want to work on the interface and provide some clarity.
First, using the top half of the visual space for what amounts to a marketing message should be eliminated. Replace it with a topic of the day or something.
Second, there should be some pre-determined questions for discussion. The forums should be easy to participate in and like TTAC should discourage flaming. I’m imagining that large scale forums like this should have the answers culled weekly so that everyone can participate without thinking their comments are too far down to be noticed or relevant.
Finally, feedback about the questions asked. Feedback from engineers, decisionmakers and anyone but the marketing department. It shouldn’t be “GM Next Spin”.
The point being, it’s set up as a one way tool to deliver a message while pretending to be something else. I don’t mean to be a cynic but in the internet age communication is at least 2-way and the customer is the expert about what they want.
The GM next site is OK. Nothing to write home about. Nothing about it interested me enough to go back to it. The site seemed awfully “PC” (insert yawn here) and rather devoid of any true substance. To me it felt like a safe and glossy GM commercial.
Perhaps I am missing something.
DT
Damn! GM, you must BUILD PRODUCTS like new v8 not play around with websites. For God`s sake! It is irrelevant. So irrelevant compared to a single new platform you could have built instead of flying around this vapourware. I am so mad, so mad. More than John Cleese in his sketches!!:(
Here’s a good quote from the site:
“Saturn recently took a new Astra to Pacific Beach, California, and hid the car’s identity with some painter’s tape. The reaction? Most people didn’t recognize it as a Saturn. In fact, many thought it was an import. …”
Well, duh.
I guess that a re-badged Opel built in Antwerp doesn’t qualify as an “import”.
“Rethink” or “Corporate Think”?
What GM doesn’t mention is that these cars are being built in a plant that was excluded from building the new Astra platform; the builders of this car are on borrowed time.
Since this car is on my “short list” for my next vehicle, this has me worried that the Belgians building it might be a bit flippant about quality issues, since they’re already aware that they’re going to be axed.
I’ll use my most jaundiced eye to check over this car when I go for a test drive (probably in Feb.).
Mr Shaker,
where did you hear that the Belgian plant is on borrowed time?
Thanks for any information you can provide.
I checked it out, wanting to post some particularly brilliant and future-forming ideas. Well, other than seeing several marketing messages available and some pre-programmed future think, I could not find any way to post anything myself.
Perhaps that function is yet to come, or else I missed how to do it…which says something also.
I must be getting old. I have trouble reading the print on GMNext. If they are going to make it difficult for me, I’ll just find another way to spend my time.
I think it’s great that the GM fanboys have a new place to hang out and stroke Maximum Bob.
Seriously, let’s start with the “Question of the Day:” “Do you think automakers need legislation that requires them to adhere to stricter fuel economy standards?”
There’s a question that’s perfectly meaningless in yes/no form. I think it’s a sad commentary that they appear to need it; I think oil dependence and environmental issues require immediate action. CAFE is the wrong way to go about it but that’s all we’ve got in the short run.
As for the site concept, it looks like yet another venue for showcasing cars they don’t build, don’t know how to build and probably aren’t as good as cars currently available from other manufacturers. What’s the problem they’re trying to address here? That the millions they’ve spent on TV ads featuring the Volt aren’t enough to firmly impress GM into the national consciousness as America’s Hi-Tech Automaker? People see the Prius out on the street and come to the erroneous conclusion that Toyota’s got the technical lead?
When we get to “Stories” am I supposed to be happy they’re developing lots of high-value jobs offshore? A while back Phil Ressler went on at length about high-value jobs we needed to keep. Phil, can you read the handwriting on the wall, here?
GM doesn’t need this web site but there’s no point telling them that.
And, from a web design perspective, the site needs improvement.
I click to “Stories,” then click a picture to see a particular story and all I get are a couple of lines and… I have to click another link to read the rest? Lame. I already clicked to indicate I was interested; show me the story.
Katie:
I saw this on a couple of Web pages (while looking for other info), here’s one I found:
http://www.reuters.com/article/bondsNews/idUSL2866542720070503
Hope this works!
The other page that I read mentioned that the Next-Gen Astra would be built in three other European plants (I believe one in Sweeden), but not Antwerp.