Reuters (and everyone else) reports that GM is suing bankrupt parts maker Cadence Innovation to recover the bits it needs to build/launch the new Chevrolet Camaro. Both more and less specifically, Cadence makes consoles, door panels and “other parts.” GM wants all of it, bad. So they’re suing, asking a Delaware Court for permission to access Cadence’s factory to recover the necessary tooling and parts to craft their Canadian retro-muscle car. “Even one day’s disruption in supply of certain Component Parts could cause a shutdown of GM assembly operations,” The General’s lawsuit proclaims, using German capitalization to emphasize the seriousness of their demands. A refusal to do so would end up “disrupting not only GM’s business, but the operations of countless suppliers, dealers, customers, and other stakeholders.” Countless? That’s a lot, right? And once they’re being both vague and alarmist, GM said the damages from Cadence’s refusal to surrender machines and parts “would be substantial, but difficult, if not impossible to calculate.” GM reckons it needs the parts-making machines by January 12th. Or a plague of locusts will descend upon the earth and boils will fester on muscle car collectors’ butts. But there’s more to this story than first meets the, uh, eye…
GM court papers reveal that it had an “accommodation agreement” with Cadence requiring the auto-parts supplier to continue to manufacture the Camaro parts and provide tooling and equipment for same. So, one wonders what happened to that “working relationship.” Perhaps, perchance, there’s a little problem with GM’s payment schedule? You know, as in money’s too tight too mention? Did Cadence, bankrupt though it may be, demand cash-on-the-nail? Did GM refuse to honor IT’S side of the bargain?
We’ll know more when we hear Cadence’s side of the story. Meanwhile, WHAT WILL GM DO WITHOUT A CAMARO TO SELL? Same thing they’ve been doing since they revealed the concept in 2006: hype the Hell out of it.
They were “Supplier of the year” in 2006.
Bet they go to JCI to help them clean up the mess.
The General’s lawsuit proclaims, using German capitalization to emphasize the seriousness of their demands.
“Component Parts” is capitalized because it is a defined term in the complaint. I doubt attorneys for the parties — or Federal judges — are interested in German punctuation. These are “boilerplate” complaints used by OEMs when a supplier goes TU.
As with every supplier bankruptcy, tooling is being used as leverage to gain better terms from creditors. GM will get their tooling back, as a matter of law. It’s just a question of how quick and dirty can get it.
To wit:
Another Cadence customer, Chrysler LLC, was authorized by the court to remove tooling used in making Chrysler vehicles. Chrysler was ordered to pay $4 million and waive any claims against Cadence stemming from financial support during the aborted reorganization.
We’ll know more when we hear Cadence’s side of the story.
Here it is:
“The cause and effect in this situation is obvious and the case is a clear set of external factors — collapsing revenue and material costs increasing at double-digit rates,” Cadence President and CEO Jerry Mosingo said in a statement.
Nothing about GM holding up payments in there. Just the usual.
I know I’m just another crank on the Internet, but does GM honestly think they are going to recover their costs on the Camaro, or is this action borne out of pure pride at this point in time?
GM will be very wise to tank this model now. It is a guaranteed sales failure. The fact that fanboys on all the blogs drooled over it and begged it to come into being is the kiss of death from the sales viabiity standpoint.
Sue to get the parts to make the cars to be stacked up on abandoned airport runways like the Challenger……
Wait, you think GM would be ‘wise’ to kill a car people actually want to buy from them? One people have been looking forward to for a long time? You know, instead of trimming countless SUVs and trucks that don’t have a loyal legion of followers. What is wise about that?
The difference between the Camaro and virtually everything else GM makes is that the Camaro is a strong brand and a car people actually want to buy from GM. Just like people want to buy the Ford Mustang from Ford. Robert wrote about this very thing in his last editorial.
GM and Ford have basically screwed up everything else they’ve ever made except for cars like these. And people want them. To not offer the car is to permanently lose a huge number of customers that were lost when the Camaro was originally discontinued who are not interested in a GTO, G8 or any other muscle car GM makes. They want the original, they want the Camaro and many of them have the money to get it.
Don’t underestimate how important cars like the Camaro (and Corvette) are to Chevrolet’s image. Stuff like the Avalanche, new Equinox and milquetoast Malibu and Impala not so much.
TriShield :
The difference between the Camaro and virtually everything else GM makes is that the Camaro is a strong brand and a car people actually want to buy from GM.
The Camaro is a model, not a brand. And if the Camaro is important to the Chevy brand, what is that image, you reckon?
The Camaro is just as much a brand as the Corvette is. Chevrolet should be purely and distinctly American in looks, dynamics and heritage like the Camaro. Without that Chevrolet is a brand that has completely lost it’s soul or anything that really sets it apart from everything else.
That’s why I don’t like the Malibu or Impala, inside and out they both look much too Asian, much too Toyota-wannabe. What good is that when we already have Toyota? Chevrolet should be Chevrolet and every model should be as well styled and engineered as the Camaro here and Corvette.
Cars that are unimportant and don’t inspire coveting or lust for a brand do not have numerous fan sites and forums devoted to them like the Camaro does. This is just as important a car for Chevrolet as the Mustang is for Ford. When GM canned it they took a huge chunk out of the brand that still makes it what it is. It was even worse for Pontiac and removed the last reason for that brand’s being and it’s last connection to the rebel spirt that made the brand big in the first place.
It will sell better than the Challenger. Almost anything will but I think it will follow the same sales pattern of specialty coupes and fall the way of the Solstice.
Judging by GM’s history, it will get little advertising and no redesign. Also judging by GM’s history if you wait 6-8 months, there will be some kind of rebate on the hood.
Other than the CTS and Escalade, I cannot recall one vehicle GM actually focused on for more than one design cycle.
RF says:
“The Camaro is a model, not a brand. (Agreed) And if the Camaro is important to the Chevy brand, what is that image, you rekon?”
Who knows? GM’s marketing is all over the place. It’s manic, to say the least.
Let’s face the facts. GM will drop a boat load of cash in marketing this new Camaro. With that said, a few thousand bow-tie-boys with great credit will step up and purchase a new Camaro. Perhaps Chevy will woo a couple thousand Mustang/Challenger converts. After the initial pop in sales, the Camaro will be a lot queen. There is nothing to suggest otherwise.
It’s a shame really, as the new Camaro will likely be a wonderful car….if not three-four hundred pounds too heavy.
I guess Chevy marketing could ride the poor mans sports car shtick.
In general, what a waste of resources for a company so close to death.
The Camaro is a model, not a brand.
I’m not so sure of that. Some model names are themselves brands. Look at Corolla. Stands for reliability, reasonable cost.
Aren’t Corian, Kevlar and Tyvek as much brands as the name DuPont.
“Camaro is a strong brand and a car people actually want to buy from GM.”
And how many banks are going to give some 600-credit-score wannabe-mulletteer a loan on a $40,000 Camaro RS SS 1LTRZ Chrome Edition? Assuming GM does the usual thing and builds heavily toward the expensive models, while people who can even afford a car have to settle for the base V6 and can’t find one. The Camaro will be cordwood by June, if it’s even in production then.
Trishield has an interesting point. Perhaps Chevrolet needs to recpture that which it did best, condense it, update it to the current day and go for the American car market not the “Camcord” market.
Let’s imagineer, to borrow a phrase (from Walt Disney).
What was so special about the 1955-1956-1957 Chevy?
It replaced the prior plane jane Chevy ONLY sold with 6 cylinders (way underpowered) just as the turnpikes (and the desire for good on-ramp acceleration and easy highway speeds) came about.
What is the current equivalent? Excellent efficiency. With good performance.
Here’s a thought for Chevy engineers and GM executives.
Go buy a few classic cars.
A 1963-1966 Rambler Classic or Ambassador (preferably an earlier car with an aluminum six).
A 1960-1973 Peugeot 404 (preferably a later car with fuel injection).
A 1990’s Volvo 940 (with solid rear axle).
A new Honda Civic GX (natural gas car).
Now; how about dumping the unimaginative, clone (clown?) cars currently planned, and building:
A new Chevrolet Chevelle. Use the Peugeot 404 as a starting point re: weight, interior size and shape, and overall technology; simple rear (right) wheel drive, an aluminum slant four hemi engine running on natural gas (with PHIL home based refuelling station sold and installed by pros) or fuelled by Propane; no need for power steering in a 2200 pound car, 1.6 litres should provide 0-60 in 10 seconds with proper gearing.
Simple, easy to work on, excellent ride (pay a royalty to Peugeot, swallow your pride and copy the suspension dead-nuts right out of the 404). Then build it as a sedan, long wheelbase wagon, convertible and hardtop coupe’.
Then price it at $15.000 “Saturn style fixed pricing” with a/c, crank windows, stereo/Mp3/CD/ipod connection stereo, optional crank sunroof (or power conv. top), optional interior trims (even leather), and optional alloys (16″?), optional 6 speed automatic, optional front bucket seats/floor shift/console. ABS, air bags, etc standard obviously.
Engineer the components to last 250,000 miles with 99% chance of survival and slap a 7 year or 100,000 mile “no quibble total guarantee” plus all scheduled services (AT your local newly friendly Chevy dealer) included in the price. Then make sure to live up to the hype. Every time with every customer.
Make the car look classy and sassy; for your inspiration, look at the 1963 Buick Riviera for the uncluttered lines, the mid-1960’s Maserati Quattroporte for the overall side and glasshouse inspiration, and make the face and tail distinctively Chevy.
Here are the basic dimensions and tech data for this 4-6 (8-9/wagon) seater family sized car: 104.33″ wheelbase, 175″ long, 64″ wide, 2250 lbs, unitbody, front coil springs/McPherson struts/lower A arms, rear torque tube (i.e. one enclosed, lubricated driveshaft pivot point behind transmission), rear coil springs, worm drive differential in a solid rear axle, transverse linkage ba, font & rear anti-roll bars, power front disc brakes, rack & pinion steering, bench seats with split reclining front seats, column shift. (Sta. wgn. 111.8″ wheelbase, 3 rows, 180″ long).
A new Chevrolet Bel Air. See above except use the basic dimensions of the 1963 Ramblers; 112″ wheelbase, 195″ long, 76″ wide, alloy hemi slanted six (yep; 2.4 litres, sharing parts with the Chevelle four) and optional 3.2 litre alloy hemi V8 (ditto) with four wheel disc brakes. Price this car (with power windows, door locks, electric power steering standard) from $21,000, and do the car as a sedan, wagon or convertible (all with four doors).
Then also offer the Corvette, Camaro, full sized pickup, new Traverse, and Volt.
Rely on Saturn dealers to ssell euro-based cars.
I am a 57 YO who has compared the NEW CAMARO in detail to the Accord Coupe and decided the GM product was the better value. I decided not to buy the Accord (we have one now we are very happy with). No one would call the Honda a muscle car but the 2 match up very close. Before you slam it based on a name from the 60’s get some facts. This car may very well be the 55 Chevy of the 21st century. IT is not a poor man’s Corvette. I would buy this even if my kids were small. It is well made and suitable for many demographics.It is real wheel drive, the only thing Honda did not offer.
If the convertible version is tight and doesn’t rattle, it could sell a LOT of copies at a reasonable price.
The Camaro is a necessary product for GM right now. It doesn’t really matter whether it sells or not (although I think it will sell better than the Challenger but not as well as the Mustang).
It’s a showroom traffic builder and that’s what the Chevy Dealers need. People will come in to look at the Camaro – just to see it.
That will give the salesmen a chance to talk to people about what great values on other vehicles are available and how easy it is to get credit,etc. on them.
our72gto, How did you examine the NEW CAMARO in detail?
Lokki, The success of Honda and Toyota should tell you that halo cars are unnecessary. Unless the Camaro would be profitable in its own right, the project should not exist.
I don’t see how it can be profitable. They killed the old Camaro because of poor sales. There’s plenty of competition and it’s already looking weak. Mustang sales have been flat or falling for a while and Challenger sales seem, at best, uninspiring. Camaro volumes will be low and, if I understand correctly, there’s no platform mates to share the development costs and I’d bet a quarter that the assembly line won’t be multi-purpose.
Anyway, I think it’s ugly.