Find Reviews by Make:
From Will GM’s Story Have a Hero? by our friends at the New York Times:
When asked at an early meeting to discuss G.M.’s culture, he gave what some members of the task force described as a long, meandering answer, concluding: “I’ve been here 25 years. This is the only culture I know.” However, Mr. Henderson quickly added that he was determined to change it.
19 Comments on “Quote of the Day: Beyond the Thunderdome Edition...”
Read all comments
Why after reading that quote was I reminded of the William Holden character’s line in Bridge Over the River Kwai, as the brain-addled British commander was short before exposing/defeating the mission to destroy the Japanese Army’s bridge-building enterprise:
“Kill him! Kill him!!” **
Of course, the Alec Guiness character did the right thing in dying before that happened, and falling on the plunger in the process.
p.s. I suppose it won’t be long before something reminds me of the David Attenbourough character’s line from the same movie, delivered just after the above scene:
“Madness, madness!” Oh, wait, somethings already have…
** Re kill: I’m speaking metaphorically here.
If you had even the slightest hope that GM would pull itself up by its bootstraps, this quote utterly, irrefutably proves that—damn the NSFW filter—GM is fucked.
I have railed on about GM culture and the lack of fresh blood to the point that I am sick of the subject. This quotation is just another example of my point.
Also, I read the entire NYT article. At the end, they refer to Alfred Sloan who ran the company from the 20s through the 40s. Good Old NYT thinks that Sloan’s management tenets still infuse the company. Or maybe GM people think that this is true and the NYT buys it without a second look. This is so WRONG, I scarcely know where to begin. If the company were still run according to the Sloan blueprint, it would still command 40 percent of the market.
The fact is that GM started throwing the Sloan principles over the side in the late 1960s. The result has been a disaster.
For bootstrapping, a full hybrid of the Piëch/Gorbachev type might be recommendable…
Fact checking isn’t part of NYT’s culture.
The fact is that GM started throwing the Sloan principles over the side in the late 1960s. The result has been a disaster.
+1
Over at SpeedSportLife (Jack Jack Baruth’s site) he pointed out how in one article how in the middle to late ’60s a Cadillac was seen was like a Bentley is today, and an Oldsmobile was like a Lexus. A Chevrolet was the equivalent of Kia. That is putting REAL space between your brands, not badge engineering.
http://www.speedsportlife.com/2008/04/29/avoidable-contact-11-how-fake-luxury-conquered-the-world/
The standard of integrity at the NYT (aka the Grey Old Lady or Old Grey Lady or the flatulent old baggle)was established decades ago w/ Walter Duranty and further demostrated by the likes of Jason Blair (and a few others I won’t go into since, even I recognize this is a car site).
“Facts? We don’t need no stinkin’ facts! We’re the (money losing) New Yawk Timez! (And tell us to check our spelling!”
I think Goverment Motors will only fly until a _true_ conservative is elected, then it will go off the teat and sink or swim.
By “true conservative”, I mean “not like GWB”, “not Colin Powell (or like him)”, but either a true libertarian and/or true conservative, and you’ll know them by their calling card.
Till then, GM is “our” car company, for better or worse.
By “true conservative”, I mean “not like GWB”, “not Colin Powell (or like him)”, but either a true libertarian and/or true conservative, and you’ll know them by their calling card.
Exactly.
“Ours” for worse. Washingtoon’s forever.
GM’s biggest problem is it’s attitude. It has a seething, searing, burning hatred for its suppliers, dealers, and customers. It doesn’t much care for cars and trucks either. This was clearly demonstrated in 1983-1985. When called on it, it just seemed to increase their bravado and swagger.
The current make nice attitude is an act that fails to conceal the omnipresent loathing for anything outside the hollowed Tubes.
You can cut the blazing contempt and arrogance still present at GM with a knife.
Nothing since the Chapter 11 has indicated any change in that attitude.
Glad to see the NYT’s former distribution center in Edison NJ being demolished.
Exit 10 on the NJTP, it’s the new rubble just south of the exit.
Over a year on the market, couldn’t lease, sell, or otherwise off it.
At one time that was a bustling warehouse of “of all the news that’s fit to print”.
Now, they’re borrowing a quarter bil from Carlos Slim at Master Card rates, to keep the lights on.
For all those who worked for years to help the General (includes me btw) and must someday admit defeat / failure:
God grant me the serenity
to accept the things I cannot change;
courage to change the things I can;
and wisdom to know the difference.
Living one day at a time;
Enjoying one moment at a time;
Accepting hardships as the pathway to peace;
Taking, as He did, this sinful world
as it is, not as I would have it;
Trusting that He will make all things right
if I surrender to His Will;
That I may be reasonably happy in this life
and supremely happy with Him
Forever in the next.
Amen.
–Reinhold Niebuhr
I think Goverment Motors will only fly until a _true_ conservative is elected, then it will go off the teat and sink or swim.
There are not (and have never been) electable real conservatives for the same reason there are no electable real socialists. Ideological purists a) are too rigid to deal with actual people and b) make their potential supporters and colleagues uncomfortable.
GM will be on pogey until such time as they’re either a) too politically toxic or b) we’re safely out of the recession.
BDB : ,,, in the middle to late ’60s a Cadillac was seen like a Bentley is today, and an Oldsmobile was like a Lexus. A Chevrolet was the equivalent of Kia. That is putting REAL space between your brands, not badge engineering.
But today everyone wants (and can have) whatever they like; or at least it was so until the recent credit crunch. The advent of low mileage two and three year leases with a small down payment made it possible for everyone to ride. I see secretaries driving Lexi SUV, and kids just starting out of college tooling around in ultimate driving machines.
I’m not sure where this leaves the General. Other than Corvette (something mostly middle aged white guys consider–and US demographics don’t favor middle aged white guys), what desirable product does the company sell? It would have been better for everyone if the company had just gone away when they had the chance.
“I think Goverment Motors will only fly until a _true_ conservative is elected, then it will go off the teat and sink or swim.”
psarhjinian +1 – the RNC and DNC are much closer in both deeds and ideology than their emotive rhetoric may suggest. The industry lobbyists they favor may differ but the outcome is very much the same. I also doubt the RNC was ever conservative – Reagan and GWB alone are responsible for nearly 70% of our current national debt. The myth of conservatism was invented by Nixon for his (very successful) “positive polarization” campaign strategy.
I don’t see what facts the NYT got wrong almost everything in the article has been reported here. The comment about Sloan is right on though. A big, no huge, problem at GM is that they think it’s 1959 and changing any part of that is excruciating, usually years too late and half-assed in execution.
Carperson hit the nail. GM traditionally (from the Sloan days) has had an adversarial relationship with labor and suppliers. It tolerated its customers in the past because of GMAC but now finds that it needs customers to survive. I don’t think Henderson is the guy to change all of that, they really need an outsider to come in and make the drastic changes that need to be made.
While it’s not looking terribly sunny for GM at moment (general / government motors: your choice) the management change / recycling may surprise us. Then again, it may not.
Meanwhile, A question for the best and brightest, inspired by this article:
Which car companies __should__ survive?
And if they survive, what vehicles should they be producing / selling ?
Fritz the Cat has been at GM for 25 years, “this is the only culture I know(!)”…and he expects to change it…what a Cluster ***k. If he can significantly change GM culture and the way the corporation operates, I’ll be more than a little suprised.
“Which car companies __should__ survive?”
The ones that can produce cars for a profit that customers will buy.
“And if they survive, what vehicles should they be producing / selling ?”
The vehicles that customers will pay their hard earned money to buy.
You see, it’s not for us to say who lives or dies as a corporation or what kinds of vehicles they should make. Like we would be that wise. You don’t know who will come out with the next great car or segment defining vehicle. I shake my head at folks on the interwebs who all-knowingly post “brand x needs to die” verbal diarrhea. Let the market run it’s course. Let the deeds of those who work at these corporations decide who succeeds and who fails. It’s not possible and not in our power to make those decisions. Yes, I know that governments (plural, from many countries) have interfered and tried to stack the deck in favor of one company or another. But it won’t work forever. Eventually the customers will decide who makes it and who ends up as a page in the history books.