When we asked TTAC’s Best And Brightest whether Chevy should stick with the “Aveo” nameplate for its new subcompact offering or move in a new direction, only a few seemed to believe that “Aveo” carries much equity at this point. But then, it’s not like Chevy has a lot of small-car “heritage” to draw on… Sprint, Vega, Monza and Citation all have their obvious limitations. The B&B’s debate was typically dynamic, but it seems that this discussion has gone back and forth at the RenCen as well. GMI reports:

GM has struggled with the Aveo’s name for the last two years. According to sources former U.S. marketing chief Mark LaNeve originally wanted to rename the Aveo to “Viva.” Then–following GM’s bankruptcy filing last year–Bob Lutz ordered the Aveo name to stay put…

The lackluster image of the current Aveo has left GM’s new marketing chief, Joel Ewanick, to conclude that the car needs to be renamed. Although GM has not formally announced the new name, GMI sources are stating that GM has signed off on the name “Chevrolet Sonic.”

According to U.S. Trademark records General Motors LLC filed for a trademark on the name “Chevrolet Sonic” on October 5th.

Note to those who comment “slow newsday?” whenever there is something that can be construed as even mildly uncomplimentary towards GM (sorry if you bought the stock.) You are right. The newsday must be glacial. First, the Freep’s investigative reporters unearthed a slowdown at Toyota. Now, the crosstown competition at the DetN found GM’s super-secret car of the future. Stop press! It will be that epic fail, formerly known as the Segway. (Read More…)

When Bob Lutz came back from retirement for the umpteenth time, one of the first orders of business was to kill the Z28 Camaro. The only thing that was in high gear at the times was carmageddon, electric cars were the wave of an uncertain future, and come on, how more politically incorrect can you get than with an 8 cylinder that makes anywhere between 500 and 600 hp, while producing enough plant food to keep the world’s rainforests lush and green? Rainforests rejoice: (Read More…)

It’s the policy of many automakers that you can’t get through the factory gate unless you drive something made by that company. If recent trends continue, GM’s largest stockholder will have to park outside and walk.

The U.S. government, now owning 33 percent after a pre-IPO 61 percent of GM, bought most of its cars from the competition. Bloomberg had to file a Freedom of Information request with the GSA until they handed over the data. This is what they received: (Read More…)

GM China, our recently no longer so reliable oracle for the Chinese market, raised its November sales by 11 percent, compared to an absolutely batty November 2009. 11 percent are not the same growth as the 109.5 percent GM China had recorded in last year’s November, but how much battier do you expect them to get? The more meaningful number is that for the first 11 months of 2010:  From January through November, GM’s China sales jumped 33 percent to a mind-blowing 2.17 million units. GM China will most likely close out the year in the 2.35 to 2.4m area – this is higher than the total sales of some of Europe’s larger countries, and definitely a whole lot more than GM sells back  home. Better get used to it. (Read More…)

Both Toyota and the remains of its joint venture known as NUMMI have sued the remains of “Old GM” for breach of contract according to two separate reports in the Wall Street Journal [sub]. NUMMI is seeking $365m, claiming GM caused the collapse of the joint venture by unilaterally pulling out as it collapsed into bankruptcy,  sticking Toyota and NUMMI with the bill.

Those decisions breached … commitments to Nummi and sounded its death knell,” said the lawsuit, filed last week. And unlike Toyota, GM’s bankruptcy estate “has refused to contribute to Nummi’s deficit during the wind down”

Toyota, meanwhile, is suing for some $73m in development costs for the Pontiac Vibe, a vehicle that GM was supposed to sell for another two years.

(Read More…)

The following is a “Confidential” memo from the US embassy in Berlin, leaked in the latest Wikileaks dump, describing German reaction to GM’s flip-flop decision to not sell its German subsidiary, Opel. The memo reveals that Germany saw GM as a “unreliable partner” and that at least one German government official believed that “if the U.S. Government had GM under better control, this would not have happened.” The document also confirms that GM scuttled the deal largely over concerns about Russian access to its intellectual property, and that Opel may well have been happy to see the deal fall apart rather than face losing its entire BMW supply business. Though none of this information is completely new, the leaked document provides a fascinating insight into the muddled mess that was the Opel rescue.

BERLIN 00001395 001.2 OF 002

Classified By: ECONMIN Robert A. Pollard for reasons 1.4 (b,d).

1. (C) Summary: Just hours after Chancellor Merkel’s historic November 3 address to a joint session of Congress, General Motors (GM) canceled its sale of Opel to Canadian auto parts manufacturer Magna. The decision, which followed repeated assurances from GM that it was a done deal, came as a complete shock in Germany and dominated media coverage throughout the day. Merkel herself was reportedly highly upset over GM’s flip flop. Ulrich Wilhelm, the Chancellor’s spokesman on Opel said the German government “regretted” the decision, and reminded GM that it must now repay Berlin’s 1.5 billion bridge loan to Opel by the end of the month, while FDP Economics Minister Rainer Bruederle described GM’s action as “totally unacceptable.” The cabinet was expected to discuss the GM move on November 4. Opel’s labor unions, which had strongly backed the Magna sale because of its promise to save jobs and keep plants open, announced that workers would withdraw all concessions made under the terms of the Magna deal and start a general strike at Opel plants on November 5. While anger is widespread, there are already some voices outside the government advocating acceptance of GM’s announcement as the only viable alternative to a total collapse of Opel. End Summary.

(Read More…)

AutoWeek reports:

Bill Mitchell, only the second man to head General Motors styling when he took over from the monumental Harley Earl, was not a man about whom people were impartial. GM’s official history reveres him. Harley Earl’s family reviles him. His coworkers and subordinates at GM either loved him or despised the man. Even landmark designs that were signatures of his reign at GM Styling, the split-window 1963 Corvette Sting Ray and the boat tail Rivieras, are polarizing designs that had detractors, including some on the GM Styling staff. He admittedly ran that department like a dictator, though he rarely fired anyone. Mercurial in temper, he’d have screaming fits at his design staff, laced with the most vulgar epithets, then defuse the tension with an offhand joke as he left the room. Shamelessly ambitious and self-promoting, often taking personal credit for his staffs’ designs, had the term “larger than life” not existed, Mitchell would have coined it to describe himself.

By today’s standards of workplace political correctness, diversity and racial and sexual harassment law, Bill Mitchell was an atavistic throwback to an age when ethnic jokes by supervisors were uncomfortably endured by the brunt of that ‘humor’. An executive then could tell his secretary to order him up some hookers after a multiple martini lunch, knowing that she’d hold all calls and cover for him if his wife (or another executive) got jealous. As a result, in addition to whatever praise and criticism his aesthetic direction and management skills have garnered, Bill Mitchell’s legacy has been somewhat tarred with the brush of bigotry.

The question is are we being fair to the man? Are we applying contemporary standards to an era that was simultaneously more innocent and more evil in terms of racial, ethnic and other prejudice?

(Read More…)

Arthur Ross started in 1935 as a „Creative Designer” at GM. He did Cadillacs and Buicks. He had a hand in drawing the lines of some famous cars of those times, the Cadillac Sixty Special, LaSalle, Fleetwood, and the Buick Y-Job, GM’s first concept car. He also was a pervert. (Read More…)

The official MPG(e) ratings for Chevy’s Volt and Nissan’ Leaf have been out for a few days. Finally, The Nikkei [sub] noticed something: Nissan’s “all-electric Leaf has gained bragging rights in the U.S. market after garnering a higher fuel economy rating than the Chevrolet Volt.” Bragging rights bestowed courtesy of the U.S. government. (Read More…)

Yesterday, Ed introduced us to the latest addition to GM’s brand portfolio, the BaoJun. Introduced in China, it is allegedly slotted below the Chinese Chevrolet and the Chinese Buick, and supposedly, it is targeted at “first-time buyers in the nation’s second- and third-tier markets,” or so the propaganda goes. The car is made by the SAIC-GM-Wuling (SGMW) joint venture. We’ve had our eyes on that brand for a while, and eyed it with interested suspicion. The suspicion seems to be warranted. (Read More…)

Ever since the auto bailout began, the majority of Americans have opposed the government’s efforts to fund and restructure the auto industry. As recently as July, polls showed that 56 percent opposed the bailout, according to the Detroit News. But now a new Rasmussen poll shows that opposition has fallen to 46 percent with 38 percent in favor and 16 percent unopposed, the first time a poll has found less than 50 percent opposition to the auto bailouts. 70 percent of Americans now believe GM will still be in business a decade from now, and 50 percent believe the government is either “somewhat” or “very” likely to be repaid by GM and Chrysler. Of course, the Treasury still believes that it will lose some $17b on the auto bailout, but then you don’t exactly hear that trumpeted by the White House.

What you do hear about the auto bailout is an increasing tone of triumphalism, an endless repetition of the phrase “the critics were wrong.” And yes, the auto bailout has certainly progressed better than some of its harshest critics here a TTAC might have imagined. But if, over a year after the bailout ended, some 46 percent of America still opposes the government’s intervention in GM and Chrysler, marketers for both of these companies (not to mention the politicians) should sit up and take notice. After all, the “success” purchased with that $80b still depends on the goodwill of the American people, and if the bailout-haters never drop their grudge, GM and Chrysler’s already-overblown “success” won’t last. And for all the “Mission Accomplished” moments since GM and Chrysler emerged from bankruptcy, we still haven’t heard a compelling pitch to the resilient anti-bailout plurality.

Because success in the auto industry depends upon both the buildup of industrial might and deft maneuvering on the winds of fashion, analysts often struggle to determine how business decisions impact consumer choice. For example, GM and Chrysler long resisted the pressing need to file for Chapter 11 bankruptcy protection because their leaders believed that Americans would not buy a car from a bankrupt firm, and that sales would go into an irrecoverable tailspin if they filed. Needless to say, that assumption proved to be deeply flawed, and sales during the GM and Chrysler bankruptcies barely dipped (if only compared to the miserable months preceding bankruptcy). In any case, the rating agency Moody’s is taking on the challenge of translating good business news into sales by arguing [via Bloomberg]

U.S. consumers who don’t know anything about over- allocation options or the need for strong liquidity in a cyclical industry knew that something exceptionally good happened to GM last week. That knowledge makes it more likely that they will consider buying a GM vehicle and possibly buy one. That’s good for the company’s credit quality.

But does the general air of positivity surrounding the IPO actually make a difference with consumers?

(Read More…)

Forget about Europeans complaining about missing parts. Over in America, there is an acute car shortage. Dealers blame who they always blame: The manufacturers. “They’ve cut back production so much that we’ve run out of cars,” Boston dealer magnate Herb Chambers tells his hometown paper, the Boston Herald. He says he had to “beg, borrow and steal” Cadillacs from dealers in other parts of the country. Down at the South Shore, dealer Dan Quirk loses 60 to 90 sales a month. “The Big Three just don’t have enough manufacturing capacity any more,” kvetches Quirk. “Some of the automakers, particularly General Motors, closed a lot of their plants when the meltdown hit.” Supposedly it’s not just a Bostonian phenomenon. Supposedly. At closer look, it might be a fire breathing, rip-snorting chimera. (Read More…)