I vote for him. The only guy who has a vision.

 

I agree

 

ditto

 

Too late. Chairman Ed Whitacre is the new CEO. Bad because he's not a car guy. Good because he knows how to turn a business around. If I recall, there was talk that he was intended to replace Rick Wagoner from the get go.

Anyway, if Lutz sticks around to influence marketing and design, and Whitacre focuses on trimming the fat, GM may do very well.

 

I think Fritz was the only person keeping Bob from killing Ed. Now that he's gone, Bob won't be far behind if they can't stop hemorrhaging cash. Ed doesn't want to listen to car guys right now, he wants to turn GM back into a profit machine and possibly acquire some competitors along the way. It's a good, focused goal that GM hasn't had in eons.

Trying to sell Saturn and Saab turned out to be a waste of precious resources and time. They should have just turned out the lights in June anyway.

 

Has anybody ever stopped to consider that the *wrong* divisions were shut down? Oh sure, Saturn, Hummer, they needed to go, Saab wasn't too big of a focus either.

But why do you keep the redundant GMC nameplate and drop Pontiac? Why do you need a second line of trucks which basically parrot every offering you get from Chevrolet, just to have an "up-sell" brand of trucks?

Isn't focusing on trucks what got GM in this hole in the first place? Being unable to anticipate the swing of the market and steer away from the gas-chugging full-size truck market, then pushing forth substandard compact trucks (read: Colorado/Canyon)?

The logic is staggeringly bad.

If Whitacre as a business guy is able to turn things around so they can get back to the basics ... concentrating on what customers want and producing it at high quality ... then more power to him.

One request, though ... y'know, as long as you're going to keep Opel, and gave Fritz the bum's-rush because he was so gung-ho about selling it, why don'tcha bring a couple to the US? Like the GT, so that at least we still have a sporty 4-cylinder roadster in lieu of the Sky and the Solstice.

 

Actually, the opposite seems to be happening. Lutz was given more responsibility simply because he knows the business inside and out. Whitacre knows he needs that inside knowledge to succeed.


Not being able to anticipate the market facilitated their fall, but was not the cause. GM's problems stem back 30-40 years, so the truck issue was only one of the straws that broke the camel's back.

Trucks are still very marketable. How many Tundras, Sequoias, and Titans do you see on the road? GM and Ford still own the truck market. They are aware that it will not be the same crazy sales they enjoyed in the past few years. Still, as the economy slowly recovers, many people who really NEED a truck will be coming back into the market. Those buying will be looking for American name plates. GM would be foolish to ignore that potential. Keeping GMC seems silly, but it is still considered the "upscale" version of the trucks, and more important, is a strong brand. Combined sales of the GMC & Chevy pickups outsell Ford. Dropping GMC may be, from a sales and marketing perspective, giving sales to Ford and Chrysler.

 

I'm not seeing anything out there worth the price tag associated with the car. The HHR is at least $20K plus taxes for one with minimal extras. I was looking at a Ford Edge and they are $23K while the hybred ones are $35K. I like the "station wagon" utilitarian fuction of this type car. This is my forth wagon car, not including a VW Rabbit, in which you could fold down the back seat an had lots of room for stuff.

I didn't understand the cut of Pontiac as I've had five of them (I still have three in the garage). Neither did I understand the Saturn cut, as they did make good cars when they were built with the enduroflex panels, but have gone to metal stamped body panels, so just like another GM car.

Anymore it appears to me the the car manufactuers slap on an outragous base price then tack on over priced options, just to run the prices up.