Plus diesels and hybrids. After 2012. Maybe. [Automotive News [sub]]
Find Reviews by Make:
Posts By: Robert Farago
I know these Volt Birth Watches are polarizing. So if you’re a Volt booster, look away now. ‘Cause I’m about to excoriate GM for attempting to keep the cloak of invisibility around its taxpayer-funded plug-in electric – gas hybrid Hail Mary Chevy Volt. Now I’m fully aware that any such criticism may spark (so to speak) charges of editorial hypocrisy. Although TTAC has no “party line” on any given subject, its main voices have consistently taken GM to task for boasting about the Volt—-when they should have just shut the f up, built the thing, tested it and THEN unleashed their PR campaign. This despite (or because of) the fact that the Volt eventually became GM’s poster child for its “Save Detroit, Save The Economy” campaign, that eventually led to the automaker’s nationalization (in case you’d forgotten). GM’s claims for the Volt’s completely untried technology—in terms of performance, reliability, price, profit, mpg (230 city!), this, that and the other thing—have done the company no favors, aside from the salutatory effect on environmentalists’ hope for change. But here’s the thing: GM crossed the e-Rubicon a long time ago. It’s time to tell its “investors” exactly what we’re paying for, or kill the goddamn thing and spend the money turning “May the Best Car Win” from a sad, pathetic, delusional joke to walking the talk. Ahem. Wired. Volt “shakedown cruise.” Irony? Absolutely. Insight (joke)? Nope. More GM lies and deception . . .
The Las Vegas Review Journal reports that “Last year, more police in America died in traffic crashes, 44, than from gunshots, 39, according to the National Law Enforcement Memorial Fund, which tracks officer deaths. That trend has continued through the first half of this year, with traffic deaths outpacing shooting deaths 35 to 22. For the 12th year in a row, traffic-related incidents remain the leading cause of death for law enforcement officers.” The obvious if highly ironic answer: slow down. “In the past year, the Dallas Police Department and the Illinois State Police revamped their driving policies to include limits on how fast their officers can drive. Both moves were prompted by officer-caused crashes that killed civilians. The Metropolitan Police Department could soon follow suit once it completes a review of its driving policies that was ordered by Sheriff Doug Gillespie when officer James Manor, 28, died in a crash in May. Manor, who was responding to a domestic dispute call, was driving at a speed of 109 mph without lights and sirens on Flamingo Road when a pickup turned into his path. He was not wearing a seat belt and died a short time after the crash. Police have not released details of Wednesday’s deadly crash as they continue their investigation, but it appears that speed was a factor.”
Mark LaNeve’s career success at GM—moving from minor league Cadillac man to the head of S&M (Sales and Marketing)—is a text book example of GM’s obliviousness to the idea of accountability. Despite failing to resurrect Cadillac’s fortunes, despite helping Rick “Captain Queeg” Wagoner fondle his balls (read the book) as GM sank into bankruptcy, LaNeve didn’t go down with the ship. While his turf was carved-up post-C11, the beneficiary of the slice and dice was none other than failed Car Czar Bob Lutz, who assumed LaNeve’s marketing remit. Did LaNeve even take a salary cut? Don’t make me laugh. But if you do want to solicit a sad sort of chuckle, remind me that LaNeve is headed to Allstate. You’re in good hands? The man is bitching about his Escalade payment, having overseen the destruction of billions in shareholder value and the disappearance of thousands of dealers. See? If it wasn’t so sad, it would be funny.
To: All GM Dealers
After 28 years in the auto business and 24 with GM, I can’t believe that beginning next week I will be doing something different than trying to sell cars and sweating out another month-end close.
It’s been a great ride to this point and I wouldn’t be leaving if not for a great opportunity in a great industry in a great town. To that end, Chicago is close enough to Detroit to make the relocation manageable and has outstanding special needs resources for my sons. In the meantime, I feel good that I’m departing at a time that GM is on the right track with great products, dealers and employees. A clean balance sheet for the first time in decades doesn’t hurt either.
OK, so, was GM’s 60-day guarantee program a success or another California eBay-style unacknowledged flop? Here are the facts, according to failed Car Czar and current Marketing Maven Maximum Bob Lutz [via Automotive News, sub]: “GM has sold about 150,000 vehicles since the program began. Of that, just over 100 customers have opted to take a 60-day money-back guarantee, Lutz said. The rest turned down that option and instead took a $500 cash incentive. ‘Out of hundreds of thousands, the people who’ve selected the 60-day guarantee were in the hundreds,’ GM’s marketing chief said during a media event here today. ‘We have had one substantiated return of a vehicle.’” So less than one percent opted for the money-back guarantee. Flop. BUT only one percent of the one percent went on to return a vehicle. (A buyer who regretted opting for an autobox ‘Vette instead of the stick, apparently.) Success! So . . . a successful flop?
I don’t think Automotive News [sub] knows what to make of Chrysler. Applying the “anyone with half a brain” test to their ChryCo reportage, we can see that AN possess the requisite 50 percent cranial capacity. And yet, for better or worse , Detroit’s denizens are their homies. So, really, AN’s never too far from the Kool-Aid dispenser. The tension between what is and the hagiography surrounding Chrysler’s tight-lipped Canadian CEO is obvious in this morning’s article about management disco in Auburn Hills (DO the shuffle). “In June, CEO Sergio Marchionne elevated Peter Fong and Michael Accavitti to lofty positions in the new Chrysler Group — Fong as CEO of the Chrysler brand and Accavitti as CEO of Dodge. They lasted only four months before resigning last week. The abrupt changes signal that the hard-charging Marchionne doesn’t play by Detroit’s old-boy rules in his attempt to revive recently bankrupt Chrysler.” Either that or . . . chaos. [Your guess here.] Check this out, revealed in the irony-free subhead “Machionne’s Gospel” . . .
If cocaine is God’s way of saying you have too much money, a Ferrari is God’s way of saying you have too much money and too clean a driving license. Of course, there are plenty of good reasons to buy a bit of Maranello magic. The average Fezza makes Marissa Miller look like Hagrid. While a Ferrari will kill you dead with snap oversteer, right up to that point, they handle like a Camillus Sizzle Folding Lockback. The cars smell like sex and sound like . . . sex. Well, someone having sex. Someone LOUD, experiencing a great deal of echt pleasure. Of course, there are plenty of reasons NOT to buy a Ferrari. Chief amongst them: attempting to light a box of wet cigars with hundred dollar bills is a more financially rewarding pursuit. But if you should be considering the possibility of owning a Ferrari, even from afar, here’s something to keep in mind: it will not get you laid. In fact, there was only one time I ever saw a woman put out for a Ferrari owner. It was a key scene in Peter North’s short-lived Maximum Thrust series. And I got the distinct impression that the woman in question (and the man in the woman in question) would have done the wild thing if they’d used a 1967 Camaro as the bait car. Keeping in mind the whole scene was fictional. Well, in terms of motivation. Anyway . . .
Let us begin with the money shot, courtesy BiofuelsDigest. “If it were up to me, I would put every cent into electric cars.” That would be the US Secretary of Energy, Dr. Steven Ch, at a meeting on alternative fuels, according to “a source present at the meeting.” As a part of an administration whose election campaign received cash and free jet travel from ethanol producer Archer Daniel Midlands—not to mention political support from farming states for whom the term “pork barrel” seems to have been invented—Chu’s remarks were, shall we say, politically inadvisable. And so the DOE’s Director of Public Affairs swung into damage control mode: ”I can’t verify the quote you are using from an undisclosed source at an undisclosed meeting, which is at best wildly out of context,” Dan Leistikow backpedals. “Secretary Chu talks about the potential of biofuels in nearly every public speech, as well as on Facebook and Youtube.” Thanks for the YouTube link Danny. Meanwhile, the only Facebook page I can find is “The fans of Steven Chu,” which celebrates “the erudite hotness of Nobel Laureate/eco-warrior Steven Chu.” Strangely, there’s no mention of the torrid subject of bio-fuels to be found.
On this Wednesday’s wailing wall, Autoextremist.com lambastes Motown’s marketeers for their cowardice and creative poverty—without naming names, providing egregious examples or suggesting rectification. “Automotive marketers are too often squeamish, risk-averse or clueless. There, I said it. Yes, at least 75 percent of the people involved in automotive marketing don’t know what the hell they’re doing – it’s a pathetic fact but it’s the High-Octane Truth.” Not in these parts it isn’t. You want the truth? DeLorenzo is guilty of the same timidity that he assigns to unnamed auto execs and their equally unidentified ad agencies. Where’s the indignation at GM for cutting Caddy’s cutting-edge ad agency adrift? Or some good-old-fashioned finger pointing at Bob Lutz, for his infinitely asinine decision to put Chairman Wiseacre at the front of the nationalized automaker’s laughable “May the best car win” ad campaign? Where’s Chrysler? What’s up with Ford’s epic failure to figure-out Lincoln? Someone show DeLorenzo how to sample crickets chirping. Meanwhile, truth be told, DeLorenzo’s dissing the competition for no greater goal than feathering his own nest . . .
This is a tough call. But first, let’s play connect the dots . . . Twice upon a time, I touched upon the fact that the expression “The Cadillac of . . .” had all but disappeared from the popular lexicon. Joe Blow was no longer associating otherwise unrelated product excellence with GM’s luxury brand. A few weeks later, one of our Best and Brightest sent us a screen cap of a Google ad for the new Cadillac SRX, which claimed the vehicle was the “Cadillac of Crossovers.”(Someone at RenCen was paying attention.) And now, suddenly, Cadillac as metaphor has re-entered the mainstream. The debate over a proposed federal tax on health care premiums above $8k (private) or $21k (families) refers to said policies as “Cadillac health care plans.” Here’s the lede from today’s New York Times: “A proposed tax on high-cost, or ‘Cadillac,’ health insurance plans has touched off a fierce clash between the Senate and the House as they wrestle over how to pay for legislation that would provide health benefits to millions of uninsured Americans.” The Times, which never met a tax it didn’t like, feels obliged to put the GM brand in quotes. Why’s that then?
One of TTAC’s tipsters reports that GM has erroneously recalled 8k vehicles. D’oh!
Date: 10/08/2009 Ref. number: XXXXXX Subject: 09041A / 09077A – Noncompliance Recalls – Retraction Letter
GM SERVICE AND PARTS OPERATIONS
URGENT – DISTRIBUTE IMMEDIATELY
Date: October 9, 2009
Subject: 09041A / 09077A – Noncompliance Recalls
Shift Lever Indicator May Not Display Correct Gear
Retraction Letter Mailed to Certain Customers
Models:
2009 Buick Enclave
2009 Chevrolet Cobalt, HHR, Malibu, Traverse
2009 GMC Acadia
2009 Pontiac G5, G6
2009 Saturn AURA, OUTLOOK
Speaking of GM’s “May the Best Car Win,” Renault is telling its dealers exactly how to convince potential customers that competitors’ products suck. Our French-speaking friends are invited to offer translations of Cardesiac‘s article below. Mais moi? Non. For pure entertainment value (a TTAC hallmark j’espere) I prefer Yahoo’s babel fish. To wit: “And for this reason, nothing is worth tacler a little the competitors with some arguments felt well to underline their defects, to start with the most sharpened of them: Ford Focus RS. And Renault is not tender: design close to the universe of the tuning, completions to be perfected, alarming consumption and tax CO2 (weight), disappointing motricity (nose gear sometimes floating in acceleration, resources limited under 2.000 tr/min,…), imperfect guidance of box, diameter of too large steering (12,2 m), height adjustment of the seats before tiresome, not of more radical choice of suspensions in option and little choice of personalization.” Tacler? The mind boggles. Anyway, Renault misunderstands a sales basic: a new product’s greatest competitor is the customer’s existing product. The easiest thing for a car owner to do is to keep doing what they’re already doing. Instructions on how to tell buyers thir current car is crap; now that I’d like to see.
Recent Comments