Lutz Biography
Robert A. Lutz
GM Vice Chairman, Product Development, and Chairman, GM North America
Robert A. Lutz was named General Motors vice chairman of product development on September 1, 2001, and on November 13, 2001, he was named chairman of GM North America. He served as president of GM Europe on an interim basis from March to June 2004.
Prior to rejoining GM as vice chairman, Lutz was chairman and chief executive officer of Exide Technologies. He served as chairman until his resignation on May 17, 2002, and as a member of Exide’s board of directors until May 5, 2004.
Bob Lutz
Lutz joined Exide after a distinguished career with the former Chrysler Corporation from 1986 to 1998, where he reached the position of vice chairman. Lutz also served as president and chief operating officer, responsible for Chrysler’s car and truck operations worldwide.
Lutz led all of Chrysler’s automotive activities, including sales, marketing, product development, manufacturing, and procurement and supply. He began his service with Chrysler in 1986 as executive vice president and was shortly thereafter elected to the Chrysler Corporation board. His 12 years with the company are chronicled in his 1998 book, Guts: The Seven Laws of Business That Made Chrysler the World’s Hottest Car Company. Guts was revised and updated in 2003 and retitled, Guts: 8 Laws of Business from One of the Most Innovative Business Leaders of our Time.
Before Chrysler, Lutz spent 12 years at Ford Motor Company, where his last position was executive vice president of truck operations. He also served as chairman of Ford of Europe and as executive vice president of Ford’s international operations. From 1982 to 1986, Lutz was a member of Ford’s board.
Lutz began his automotive career in September 1963 at GM, where he held a variety of senior positions in Europe until December 1971. For the next three years, he served as executive vice president of sales at BMW in Munich and as a member of that company’s board of management.
He serves as chairman of The New Common School Foundation and as a trustee of the Barbara Ann Karmanos Cancer Institute. He is also a member of the board of trustees for the U.S. Marine Corps University Foundation and vice chairman of the board of trustees for the Marine Military Academy in Harlingen, Texas.
Lutz received his bachelor’s degree in production management from the University of California-Berkeley in 1961, where he earned distinction as a Phi Beta Kappa. He received a master’s degree in business administration, with highest honors, from the University of California-Berkeley in 1962. He received an honorary degree of doctor of management from Kettering University on June 21, 2003, and an honorary doctorate of law from Boston University in 1985.
He also served as a jet-attack aviator in the United States Marine Corps from 1954 to 1965 and attained the rank of captain. Lutz was born on February 12, 1932, in Zurich, Switzerland.
140 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
GM test drives corporate blogging
General Motors is joining a handful of other companies test driving corporate blogs.† GM’s 72-year-old†Vice Chairman Bob Lutz is at the wheel of the FastLane blog. Here’s a sample…Weíre about to introduce the new ìfaceî of Saturn at the North Ameri…
General Motors bloggt.
Das GM FastLane Blog ist das erste zweite Weblog von General Motors, dem grˆflten Automobilhersteller der Welt (bei uns vor allem unter den Marken Opel und Saab bekannt). Das erste…
General Motors launches FastLane Blog
Looks like Corporate Blogging is no longer the exclusive domain of IT companies! Yesterday, General Motors launched their all new FastLane Blog…The FastLane blog is your source for the latest, greatest musings of GM leaders on topics relevant to the …
I was surprised not to see a mention of Cunningham Car Company and the C7. That was such a stunning car. Something like that, if it could have been carried over, would have resonated even in a lower priced GM product (if only the styling had been carried over) – competition for the new Chrysler 300.
A product like the Cunningham C7 is what I’d like to see from Buick – stunning but simply curved design that hints at American Heritage with a brash eggcrate (or waterfall) grille.
GM’s Bob Lutz starts blogging
GM Chairman Bob Lutz has started his own official blog, FastLane Blog, neatly illustrating that such blogs do not have to be sterile and rammed full of marketing speak, nor do you need to be an angsty teenager to…
General Motors launches FastLane Blog
Looks like Corporate Blogging is no longer the exclusive domain of IT companies! Yesterday, General Motors launched their all new FastLane Blog…The FastLane blog is your source for the latest, greatest musings of GM leaders on topics relevant to the …
dear mr lutz,
i think that our liftgates on our suv’s are poorly designed.in the process of lifting the liftgate,if it is raining ,or in the winter,rain or snow drips onto the user of the liftgate.the simple fix is to design a “lip”on the bottom of the liftgate.this would drive the rain or snow to the side of the liftgate.
(a concerned retired mfg eng)
thankyou gordon colorito
I’m impressed with GM’s efforts to be specific about future Hydrogen based vehicles but I think there is a technology combination which has been overlooked in the interim. I’m referring to the plug-in hybrid.
The key idea is to increase the battery capacity of hybrids with the focus on allowing a commuter to drive a significant portion of the daily round trip on electric power. It would be up to the consumer to determine what the cheapest option for the power source would be, but in the Southwest part of the country solar is a viable option. By shifting the energy blend from 100% gasoline today to even 30% electric/renewable on new hybrid cars the impact on energy independence would be enormous.
I’m aware the GM ran into issues with pure electric cars a few years ago, regarding range etc. but the range issue disappears if the driver still has the gasoline motor option. The key benefit is not to try and force the technology to be something it can’t be i.e. a long range one energy solution for highway driving but to look at how patterns of driving can be optimized.
As a side note, combining plug in hybrids with switching off cylinders in city traffic or while idling would futher increase the efficiency.
When I spoke with Ford about plug in hybrids, they mentioned that consumers didn’t want plug in cars. I think most consumers are becoming familiar enough with the technology of hybrids today to see that a plug-in version would just be an extension of that technology.
This Is Heartening
GM Vice Pres Robert Lutz has a blog! Welcome to FastLane The FastLane blog is your source for the latest, greatest musings of GM leaders on topics relevant to the company, the industry and the global economy, and — most…
GM blogs from the top
If you’re currently engaged in a debate about whether blogging could help the public profile of your organisation – and you’re encountering the “if it was any use then big firms would be doing it” line of resistance -…
The only thing more important than quality is design, in my opinion. That is because, if the customer doesn’t like the design of the vehicle, he will never get to know its quality, because he will walk away from it. Years ago GM knew the importance of design, but they some how forgot their own history! Their own people, like Ron Zarella, convinced them that cars are just commodities. With that point of view, the only thing that differentiates like-products is price and that is what led to the huge incentives. And GM is paying the price right now for products which can’t be differentiated from their peers. GM must get more product to market faster. In 2006, Toyota is going to hit them hard with tons of new product. I have read that GM can get a new product to market in 36 months. From the length of time it took to get the Chevy SSR to market, which was DOA, I don’t think 36 months is accurate. GM does not need more products like the ill-fated SSR.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I’m pleased with the way direction Cadillac is headed as a producer of innovative, stylish, world-class automobiles. Each new product reaffirms my decision to “buy American” and own a Cadillac. My latest car replaced a 2004 ETC Collector’s Series model, which I greatly enjoyed.
As a proud owner of a Platinum 2004 CTS-V, I offer my sincerest kudos for a job well-done. I love everything about the car with two exceptions: 1) Exceesive wheel hop; 2)Lack of a trunk lid that raises to the fully open position when the key fob is depressed. –A real inconvenience when returning to the car with bags in each hand, especially if its raining.
Thanks for taking a moment to read my letter. I look forward to many enjoyable memories in this vehicle.
All the best,
CC Clarke
Lutz Biography: General Motors Vice Chairman of Product Development
This is for Bob Lutz. It’s the gist of a thread I started on Autoweek.com.
I’m throwing this challenge out to any or all automakers. We want somebody to build us a:
GREAT BASIC DRIVER’S CAR:
The prerequisites are:
1) Powerful 4-cyl engine (160 hp or greater)
2) Rear wheel drive
3) 4-seater
4) 3-box design (conventional trunk)
In fact, we already have 4 cars with suitable platforms with the necessary hardware in place to “Git-R-Done”:
Saturn Sky
Pontiac Solstice
Honda S-2000
Mazda Miata
Remember the late great Sentra SE-R? When it came out, it was heralded as a spiritual successor to the BMW 2002. Well, one of these 4 automakers could do the same thing. Take any one of these very capable platforms and slip it under a practical 2-door sedan body. They all would be easy for us home-grown mechanics to work on – how tough would it be to change the spark plugs, oil, air filter, etc., on a front-engine RWD sedan?
They’d have plenty of room for us to get us through our everyday chores, offer reasonable gas mileage, and because of their design, probably give us a fuel tank with more than adequate capacity. They would be comfortable to live with everyday, with a decent ride. The room would also be there for us to use the car as a weekend getaway vehicle, or to take on a long trip. This would be an excellent and less costly alternative to the Evo or WRX; I don’t need to drive a 4-wheeled hand grenade every day.
The powertrain would provide us with an entertaining ride on the twisties; they would also make excellent SCCA weekend racers. And since they wouldn’t be seen as pure sports cars by the insurance companies, insurance would probably be reasonable.
And, because it’s a simple car, it’ll be simple to modify. So if we want to install our own stereos, Recaro seats, whatever, all we need is a socket set.
I’d even be happy with a manual sliding steel sunroof instead of a power moonroof, to save complexity and weight. And for Gawd’s sake, keep an automatic transmission off of the options list!
There is no reason this cannot be done, and this car could be brought to market for less than $20K. And I would personally be thrilled to see this come out with an American nameplate (Pontiac Tempest? Saturn Calypso or Hyperion?)
Please make this happen!
To: Bob Lutz
1st MAW fighter pilot & Rumi driver.
From: Iwakuni Triumph driver.
Congrats on your excellent Blog. As ever, you never cease to amaze us.
Aloha, Bryce A. Carr,
Hilo, HI
Bob, Sorry to say a co worker sent this e-mail to me; my thought are alos included (I own a 2001 SS SLP Camaro)
“I have a soft spot for GM because my first car was a ‘66 Chevy Malibu. They could have, and should have, made the GTO look mean instead of like a blob of nothing. What a major mistake (another mistake). Recently, they added fake hood scoops in an effort to make it look racier. Too little – too late.”
______________________________________________
From: Wall, James
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 9:33 AM
To: Okura, Russ
Subject: RE: Yellow goat
Pretty sad, huh?
You don’t have to wonder why general motors are bleeding red ink when they turn out stuff like that. The performance and handling are World class, 400 Horsepower, 0-60 in under 5 seconds, Independent front and rear suspension…These things are BMW M3 killers, and they almost hang with the new Corvette…but they look like another “Jelly Bean” car.
Here was one of the proposed body styles, I can’t believe they didn’t produce this:
_____________________________________________
From: Okura, Russ
Sent: Thursday, June 16, 2005 8:52 AM
To: Wall, James
Subject: Yellow goat
I saw a car yesterday that I thought was an old Chevy Cavalier. I thought to myself, “That Cavalier is in pretty good shape for it’s age”. Then I saw the badge. It was a new GTO.
Dear Mr. Lutz:
Please say it ain’t so. It’s all a bad dream. A joke. I just saw the artists conception of the 2008 Pontiac GTO in the August 8, 2005 issue of Autoweek.
Gimicky, ugly, hideous, ill portioned, a face only a mother could love and a thousands other adjectives for same.
You hear from thousands of customers that the current GTO styling is a bit boring and receive unamimous praise for the recent Ram Air IV one off and then the best your people can come up with this retro Sunbird, bad copy of a squared off chunky Mustang wantabe? It doesn’t say 60’s. It says 70’s, the worse era in American automobiles. Amazing. GM styling is beyond hope.
My father, a 30 year GM employee was right when he said “the only thing that will save GM is 200 well placed funerals”. The death and dying needs to start in the styling department.
Mr Lutz, I am a 33 yr old single male with a ok job, i don’t make a fortune but Im happy. I have a mortgage and insurance on 2 pontiacs.. One is a 96 Grand Am with 160,000 miles,my work car. My baby is a highly modified 89 formula 350( a lot more cubes) with 230,000 miles.. I am working on restoring the car I drove in high school (a 70 formula)…
I guess my point is i want a new car but cannot AFFORD one. The car payment would be more than my house payment!! not to mention the ins !?!?!?!
Build me a 2008 Formula 6 speed for around 20,000!!
things I DO NOT WANT OR NEED STANDARD ..
ABS worthless
AIR BAGS worthless
I HATE NADER AND TREE HUGERS…nuff said
SOUND DEADNER ,seamsealer, rust proofing Y???
A/C Waste of my time.
I don’t want power seats power locks,windows hatch or even power steering..
Any extra plastic junk.
Don’t really need a console cup holders , extra cig lighters or driving lights either ..
Things i do want
450 HP LS2
a 6 speed
a 12 bolt rear
a nice set of 5 spoke 17″ wheels like the last WS6s had
Seat belts
some leg room for driver and pass ..
TTOPS
windshield wipers
Basic AM FM radio
some style (69 T/A?)
no frils
I want a basic car that could be fully optioned if someone else wanted..
the last F cars were almost all fully loaded and way over priced.
Did i say i want it in a Black Firebird FORMULA
End of my rant
Tony
Dear Mr. Lutz: The ongoing selloff by the “big 3″ has succeeded in driving the value of my 2002 Chevy Silverado LS extended cab PU to a value of 1/3 its list price after 25,000 miles and not quite 3 years. A Hyundai dealer offered this much as a trade-in amount first and then my Chevy dealer matched that trade-in offer from the Korean car dealer on the next day. That was after buying 2 new Chevy trucks in the past 4 years. Brand/dealer loyalty you say? So, your business policies are set to destroy the value of Chevy trucks in a short time. Chevy trucks used to hold their value pretty well compared to cars made by the “big 3″. Our other car was an 02 Toyota Solara convertible, which we traded for the redesigned 05 Solara version one year ago. The experience was vastly different than what I experienced trying to trade Chevy truck for Chevy truck. Thus, I will sell my Silverado pickup for what it will bring on the market and make our second car another Toyota. I am 64 years old and a semi-retired shade tree mechanic who still likes cars and can now afford them as well. It is my expectation to live long enough to observe Toyota becoming the number one car manufacturer in the USA and world-wide. It is likely to take only another decade or so unless you and others in the “little 3″ make some significant changes in your business plans.
I don’t own GM cars anymore and I’m not surprised GM is loosing market share. You are your own worst enemy. You were at the top of the world as a car maker and rested on your laurels. America went through a gas crisis several years ago, remember in the late 70’s and 80’s. Also similar enough the same time America started building crappy cars. You allowed Toyota, Honda, etc. to take a foot hold in the car market, they built quality affordable fuel efficient cars.
You repeated history. Again we face high fuel cost, and again the overseas auto makers come to market with fuel efficient hybrids and were is GM?
Why do I care, because at one time GM was an American icon? It was right up there with baseball and homemade apple pie.
You guys need to get your act together, your body styles are poor, your quality is starting to slip, and fuel efficiently sucks. We can put a man on the moon, float a hotel in space, but we can’t have a reliable fuel efficient automobile. This is America the greatest smartest country in the world. We can do if GM board put’s their mind to it. For once be a leader and mandate it within your company.
For you Union workers: Take note you are not helping the situation yourself. Your productivity sucks, and your benefits are way out of line. Start letting the dead non-productive people go. Your health care benefits are part of the reason American cars cost so much. Because of Union rules plants are over staffed and employees are not held accountable. You say you can build a better car then BMW, Mercedes, VW, Toyota, Honda or Nissan, Then prove it.
Here is a tip, take all the SUV’s you are trying to sell us and market them in the middle east where they only pay 5 cents a gallon and read this book or listen to the tapes.
The Toyota Way : What Toyota Can Teach Any Business About High Quality, Efficience, and Speed
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1932378707/qid=1125145666/sr=2-2/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_2/104-1338982-6500700?v=glance&s=books
Mr Lutz,
I own one GM car, a 2003 Corvette Z06, and it’s an amazing car. It is easily a match for far more expensive cars, gets comparable mileage to cars with much less power, and I love it to death. From this we know that GM *can* make great cars, if it tries
I think that GM should produce a car to compete with the AWD Subaru Imprezza and Outback models. There are plenty of AWD SUVs and trucks on the market, but many of us who need AWD do not want an SUV. Right now, the only reasonably priced choice for us is Subaru. (Audi etc are expensive!)
I’d like to see GM produce a small AWD 4cyl car, perhaps 150 HP and ~ 3100 lbs in the base model, in the low $20’s. Maybe higher end turbo or 6cyl models could hit $30K, but an affordable low end one is important. It should handle well, not boat-like, and be available in a wagon version. There is a large market for such cars where I live (the rocky mnts) due to weather conditions in the winter. Bonus points if the AWD can be engaged only when it’s needed so it doesn’t hurt fuel economy all the time. More bonus points if there’s a hybrid version.
I would buy such a car if it was reliable and performed similar to its competitors.
Mr Lutz,
With this labor day weekend now concluded, I must say I am very disappointed with the Chevy dealerships in the Dayton OH area. A lengthy holiday weekend, save for a single dealership, they were all closed. How does GM expect to make sales if they are not open? Your competition can make an effort to be open! By the way, is it so hard for dealerships to “display” new products like the HHR in an area where the public can view them. I mention this since one of the closed dealerships had an HHR on their lot, but behind a chain link fence leaving it just barely visible. I like the new products you guys are now coming out with. But decisions that your dealerships are making, sure dont make me happy. You can add 20 other people that I encountered on Monday to that list as well.
Mr Lutz
I’m a very faithful GM fan. I own a 1998 chevy cavalier that has over 200k miles and still takes me where ever i need to go. There’s just one thing that really disapointed me and well a whole lot more fans. Please take some time to find out for your self. BRING BACK THE F-BODY http://www.gtosource.com/savefbody/frames.html
Dear Sir:
I truly value what you’re doing for GM and thus the USofA. However, it’s all going to h**l in a handbasket unless the UAW anchor is lifted from around GM’s neck.
I only have 2 reequests:
1. build a silky, smooth, fuel-sipping 4 cylinder like Toyota and Honda.
2. kill a few brands + their marketing overhead. no one should have to figure out the diff. btwn a Solstice and Sky.
Thank you & keep fighting the good fight.
-NN
Mr. Lutz,
GM is in a severe identity crisis. If you read this message, please realize that GM is out of touch with today’s youth.
1. Lose the chrome. The G6 looks great, but we hate the chrome. Chrome wheels, chrome, chrome, chrome. Give me the option for aliminum wheels on the G6.
2. Choice – Offer Sirius satellite radio in addition to XM.
3. Rethink product names. The Malibu brings to mind a 1982 tank. I am 30 years old. Bad names: Malibu, Caprice, Bonneville (anything with ville in the name)
4. Push Rod engines – go with new sohc or dohc designs
5. Offer manual transmissions on models (not everyone loves automatics) and offer 5 speed automatics, not 4 speed automatics
6. Soften the Cadillac line. Please see the Audi models. Cadillac = excessive Chrome.
7. GM needs a new model name. Cheverolet brings to mind country bumpkins (chevy, etc). Buick is in need of an image overhaul (brings thoughts of senior citizens). Pontiac has a several problem with – too much plastic on the body and the front ends look awful (see the grand prix). Saturn is pretty much a goner.
Like the Scion brand of Toyota, GM needs a brand that is in touch with today’s youth (market below 40 yrs). Offer – no chrome!, 5 and 6 speed manuals, turbocharged or multivalve high response engines, sunroofs, Sirius radio in addition to XM, decent bucket seats (see the Audi seats), standard spoilers (not the tricked out oversize unattractive spoilers on the cobalt ss – we dont live in “The fast and the furious”). The Audi A3/A4 is a perfect example of what GM should strive for. The Scion tc is also excellent. Additionally, the center mounted dashboards are tacky – lose them. Who ever thought of center mounted dashes, even though they save money, should be repremanded (think Toyota Echo).
Americans love BMWs, Audis, Toyotas, and Infinitys. Give Americans what they want – European Styling, options, and choice. How many production BMWs are running down the road with factory installed chrome wheels?
Mr. Lutz
I am sure that you believe that your company is going in the right direction. I am only an Aviation Safety Inspector, with no knowledge of automobile manufacturing! And as much as I personally dislike the word BUT I have to use it.
But in my (younger) lifetime I was forced to buy for convience! I could not afford much, so I purchased used vehicles.
That is the reason for this letter!I have owned two vehicles that were produced years ago.Vehicles that met my finacial needs,and still met my trasportation requirements.
The first requiremnt was reliable transportation, the second was good milage. The two vehicles I refer to are The Simca, and a Voxaull(not sure of the spelling). It would seem to me, both of these cars would be the perfect SECOND affordable vehicle for a family of today.
I realize your production is directed to the larger car! but maybe, just maybe a market is there that would meet the requirements of; Newly married couples, students, business travelers! and that of a second family car, which many homes can not afford today.
I realize your corporation spends a lot of money on demographics, but maybe this is a market overlooked, and the production of a size model that provided comfort, style, and above all moderate fuel consumption!
Thank you for taking the time to read this message! Although I am sure public opinion never effects change!
I have a 2004 GTO. I thank Mr. Lutz for bringing this vehicle to us. Get past the name and realize the car that it is! He’s a man with taste.
Mr Lutz, I just finished viewing the new camaro concept vehicle, sign me up. I have been a GM fan all my life, and I can’t wait for you to build this one it is a home run! I think the pony car revival is a hit, GM needs this one in the market. Looking forward to buying one of the new camaro’s!
Digital Communities And The Power Of Trust: A Look At The Future
Thirty years ago news anchorman, Walter Cronkite, would finish up his hourly news broadcast to the nation of America by saying, ‘and that’s the way it is.” Kronkite was the daily voice of gospel news truth, and America was duly…
Mr. Lutz,
You probably do not remember me but I worked with you under Bob Eaton at Chrysler Corp when you were the President. I wanted to wish you an upcoming Happy Birthday and knowing that you are on board with GM; I know that GM will be turned around and show profitability once again. You did wonders at Chrysler Corporation when I was there and I know that you still have some magic let to do the same at GM. You gave me inspiration and the leadership skill to start a profitable corporation seven years ago with GM, Ford and Chrysler. I am thankful and god bless you and your family
Dear Mr. Lutz,
I am a Patriot rather than a customer of GM. It’s time for a turn around! I’d like to see GM succeed. The last GM car I personally bought was a 1966 F85 Body Olds 442 with a Hurst Shifter and a Bench Seat. It was red with a white top – very nice.
I live in California where everyone has a car. Why doesn’t GM have a design studio here like Toyota/Lexus, BMW, and Volkswagen/Audi? It seems like you guys are out of touch with the Market? Here, we want cars that look good, handle well, and are reliable. We are picky. In California, everyone talks about what they have and why they bought it.
It seems like the key problem for GM is Design. Across your entire auto product line, the front of your vehicles look like Parrots – everyone has a beak. The secret name for GM here is “Parrotmobile.” Does someone in GM – Design like birds? All the Cadillacs and even the new Camero has one? I sure hope the guys who designed and the guys who approved the Pontiac Aztek are gone?
Many of your cars still have materials with the tactile feeling of children’s toys (read hard plastic and vinyl) in the passenger compartment. Has anyone ever really looked at a Toyota Camry or a BMW 325?
At MB/Chrysler, you almost got it right. The Chrysler 300 is precise on the road, looks reasonably good from the outside – from the back it looks like a new Bentley – and it has a distinctive design. Unfortunately, even there, the interior is still a little tacky around the dash and steering wheel, with poorly selected (read cheap feeling hard plastic) materials. How about some of the same or even better magic at GM?
It’s too bad that gas prices are so high and people are thinking about passenger cars again. Your GMC and Chevy trucks are much better than your car line. On the other hand, the Chevrolet Avalanche is seriously ugly! Also, while on this subject, the front of all Chevy trucks could definitely do with a tweak. The problem is the silver line from the Chevy Symbol to the sides of the vehicle – it breaks up the look. Every car and truck has a face. My recommendation, skip the silver French pencil mustache.
I sure hope you can do something. Attractive products, good materials, careful assembly, and focused after sale support and feedback are the keys but Design is the beginning of a turn around.
Good luck,
John Riddle
Mr. Lutz,
I am a 4th year student at Saint Louis University and I want to work in the automotive industry. You’re work is very fascinating, and I would like some advice as to how I could get involved in this exciting business.
Thank You,
Eric Fultz
If your son attended the University of Alabama in Fall of 1991, he helped me move into my apartment. He noticed my ‘71 Challenger and gave me your office number in the event I ever had any problems with my car(s). The other one was a LHS. I have always wanted to know what became of your son. He was a business major, and a very hard worker. I kept the number for years, it burned up in my house about 5 years ago. As you know, I never called the number, so I don’t know if it really was your son or your office number. I am curious about whether it really was your number and what happened to the young man that I so very much appreciated his help.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
At present, I owe a 2002 Blazer 2 dr 4×4 and this is my 4th one. The middle two where leased, both 4 door models and used by my wife for her company.
Her company then proceeded to lease fleet cars, through GE Leasing (majority GM vechiles)in 2002. After test driving all the cars, picked the 2002 Pontiac Bonneville, with the 3.8 litre engine. Although there are a few minor issues on the design of the interior and exterior, we were very satisfied with the Bonneville. It had the looks, comfort, was mechanically sound and for a large car, was very economical on fuel. Example, business trip with two people and luggage, travelling from Toronto, Ontario to Sherbrooke, Quebec,Canada,(720km) used one tank of gas, cruising at an average speed of 115 km/hr.
Unfortunaley, the lease has expired, and to our dismay, Pontiac has dropped the Bonneyville. The only GM car that was compatible was the Buick Lucerne, but was not on the fleet list (I found that this car was to much of a old mans or retirement car). The Bonneyville had that European look and feel.
(close to BMW’s)
We looked and test drove the larger GM cars, as the Chevy Impala, Buick Allure, Chevy Equinox and the Pontiac Grand Prix. Although the outside design was favourable, the interiors, as per our tastes, was a let done. The material had that plastic feel and very cold. The seats, both front and especially the rear, felt like we were seating on plywood. This is very true for the back seats, backrest (Pontiac Grand Prix was the worst, Chevy Equinox second). Also, the interior rear in all the cars tested, very little leg room. The Buick Allure was the best overall.
In conclusion, the new generation of GM cars we tested, did not meet our expectations. Must mentioned that my wife and I have always owned GM cars, as well as our parents.
Thus we had picked the FORD 500 LTD with AWD and CVT transmission. I have never been a fan of FORD, but I was very impressed with the FORD 500. The interior was excellent, in the amount of room and the materials used. The 500 had that European drive I was looking for. The way the controls were set up (very similiar to the Bonneyville), the seating, overall visiblity, all excellent (would like see more gauges,informing conditions at any time). The front grille design could be redesigned a bit more aggresively, but car design must appeal to a larger segment of the population.
In conclusion, we find that GM cars are falling behind in all aspects of car design and component realibility compared to the other manufacturers.
My other question to you is, will GM be producing a 2 or 4 door 4×4 model (with frame chassis) of the Canyon or Colorado? There seems that all car companies either have a small or large SUV’s but not in between as the S-10 Blazer.
Zen Pozniak, Ind. Eng.
Dear sir, I am 55 years old and have owned everything from a 65 mustang to olds wagon and everything in between. I recently boutght a chev malibu and I am very impressed! I never see any ads for this vehicle. I think it is understated and rated in the market. readh the comments on edmonds and you will see. I highly recomend GM advertise this jewel and also some downward price adjustments for competetive reasons. this is really a great car.
Thank You
GM have a good position at the moment to start build new fuel efficient cars. Look at fuel prices -they keep changing and energy reserves keep decreasing, efficient methods of energy conversion and utilization should be used .All new designs are really going to cut pollution. And all the car giants will have to start use alternative engines The government departments will have to start investing into this researches. If overall energy utilization at the national level has the priority, driving a heat pump by an electric motor is not the best method, due to the inefficient conversion of fossil fuel into electricity at the power station. Therefore, engine-driven heat pumps have been preferred using gas engines, diesel engines or gas turbines. The output of the heat pump is expected to be about 65% higher than electrically driven systems, based on the same amount of fuel used. The advantages of these systems are mainly due to local generation of shaft power and providing engine heat that can be usefully employed , by recovering part of the waste energy of the gases and engine coolant. Such systems can operate continuously in comparison with solar systems.. Primary energy was found to be saved by about 50% when using engine-driven heat pumps. The superiority of the gas turbine system was quite clear. This would be a kind of alternative to fuel or diesel engines on strong point of CO2 emission and global warming ,don’t you think? All that and some more I have pointed in my dissertation for Thermodynamic analysis of exhaust gas .In case some one interested or may need information for your researches ,you may look in here (http://www.coursework4you.co.uk/sprtengi3.htm)
Dear Mr Lutz,
I am 55 years old and I have been retired from the GM Fairfax Plant for 4 years. Just wanted you to know of my true blue relationship with GM and Chevy trucks. At present, I own a 1984 Chevy C-20 pickup with 346k miles on it, all put on by me and it still is running very well. I orderdd it brand new in the fall of 1983. I changed an engine in it, but all the rest of the truck is OE! I also own a 1993 Chevy Suburban with over 200k on it. It is going very well too! Just thought you would like to know this. When I reach 500k miles on the pickup, I plan to drive to Detroit and park in front of the GM building and ask to meet you personally to come down and see it.
Sincerely yours,
A.William Anderson
Platte City Missouri
Bob,
I have owned GM cars from every divison since I started driving 1977. I liked the idea of the new GTO, but not the look… Another Grand Prix Grand Am look a like was not the ticket. A 1970 1971 retro this would have been great as long as Wagner had nothing to do with adjusting the look. He is out of touch with the car owners wants. The possible up and coming Camaro looking like a 69 would have been better before his adjustments also. I agree that GM is falling behind instead of leading your trailing. This is bad why not make a retro 70 Chevelle of a 1987 Grand National. People do not seem to realize now that Toyota is making more cars it is now having growing pains.. Look at who is recalling millions.
My children tell me how their friends say Japan builds the best of everything. Made in America only means something to those people who have been around for awhile, but to see WW II aged people driving Jap cars is a slap in the face. Their is no American pride in them either. You can’t tell me when the going gets tough the tough buy Japanese. My dad always ask me when I was screwing up if I needed to take a chance on a tractor and I would say for what?
His reply” To pull your head out of your A@*! I think it is time for GM to take a chance on a tractor. Pull Wagners head from his can and start turning the company around and produce some great cars.. Think 60s and early 70s… The new Z06 corvette what a car. One more item why is GM not on the web site madeinamerica.com ??????
Mr. Lutz:
I just bought a 2006 Saab 93 Aero with the automatic (for my wife). We are very pleased with the car. I am glad to see that Saab is on the right track. It is fast, tight and a pleasure to drive. Our dealer, Gary Blake Saab in Exeter NH was great. Our Sales man was professional, friendly and sincere. We have no gripes with the car; I sold Saabs in 1996 which was not a great time to be involved with Saab as the quality was less than desired, and I am so happy to see the brand hit the mark with this car.
When compared to the BMW 3 series, The Audi A4 and the offerings burning rice the choice was very simple for us. As long as you keep building cars like the 93 Aero we will continue to buy them.
Thank you for getting this brand on track.
Tucker D. Lindquist
Mr. Lutz,
My wife and I just bought a 2006 Saab 93 Aero from Gary Blake Saab in Exeter, NH and I would like to tell you that we are very pleased with the car and our dealership experience.
I am a full blown car nut and have owned a couple of Saab’s (1986 SPG, 1985 Turbo). In 1995 and 1996 I was selling Saab’s for Herb Chambers in Boston which was not a great time to be selling Saabs. When I was a kid I grew up driving my friend Jim Mullen’s collection and while working for Mr. Chambers I was fortunate to drive his personal collection. I am letting you know this because when I rant and rave about a new car it is with the seat time of some very special cars that I can not yet afford but have been trusted to exercise.
Our Saab is terrific. It is fast for its class. It is competent and has great road manners. I think it is handsome when compared to its competition and a great little car. It is refreshing to me that this car brings the brand back to its roots. I am not a full blown Saab geek, however I enjoy driving a car with a renewed heritage that many feared was lost when GM took over the brand.
The 93 Aero in my opinion is full of personality and fun. It is not generic. It is different and not just because the key is in a strange place. My favorite cars are “sleepers” and this car fits the bill. Its beauty lies in its subtle approach. It is not a boy racer, rather it looks and plays the part of a mature sedan with a kind of ‘punk’ attitude. My wife, who is not at all a car person, describes it as a rocket ship. I love that.
So many cars seem lost when trying to establish their personality. This is not the case with the Aero. I do not understand why the automotive media has not yet picked this car up on their radar. Thank you for getting Saab on track.
Respectfully and with Great Admiration,
Tucker D. Lindquist
Kittery, Maine
Mr. Lutz,
I’ve just read that GM is considering bringing the new Holden Commodore VSS into the US as a Pontiac. This is one of the best styled and up to date (safety, etc.) performance cars of its type to come along in years.
I stongly urge you/GM to bring this car to the US. Also please make some of the two-tone interiors available as they are in Australia.
I for one would be very interested in purchasing this vehicle in 2008.
Mr. Lutz,
My wife and I love our 2006 Saab 93 Aero. Why do we have buttons on the dash and steering wheel for hands free cellular however our dealer claims this service is unavailable? This is a source of frustration.
Thank You,
Tucker
Bob Lutz mentioned in an article on cnn.com that GM needed new Hummer Products to give it sufficient market coverage. I have an idea, but when going to http://www.gm.com/automotive/innovations/new_devices it states Ideas and suggestions that can not be patented and those concerning such things as the following will not be considered: styling of products. This is part of my idea, and I would like to submit it, any ideas how I can?
Bob,
Please bring back the SATURN SL1 (with updates). This car maybe outdated but the simple SL1 idea was a great one…and owning two of them over a decade I was very unhappy to see it replaced with a mediocre ION. The cheapness in this card, its motor, and interior (center console)..made my old SL1 look superior. Toyota will always have a corolla in their dealerships regardless or profit margin or oil fluctuations..so why not bring back the SL1 that is basic but not cheap. Most people like me will not pay the higher price for the AURA vs. a cheaper toyota corolla with a better motor and reputation.
I recently did a”pull ahead” on my 2003 CTS for a 2006 STS4. I cannot express my dismay with the lack of comfort while driving. I have this car for 27 months and I do not know what I will do.I have sat on more comfortable seats in a stadium. After an hour driving in that car it takes me two hours to just relieve my back pain. I have tried all the recommendations for seat adjustments ,pads etc but doesn’t seem to help.I have never had such a problem in any of the cars I have driven. I AM LEASING 4 GM CARS AT THIS TIME FOR MY FAMILY AND NO ONE EVEN WANTS TO DRIVE THIS CAR.
It is sad to see Mr. Lutz continue to fight against the increase in CAFE standards. The last century is littered with giant companies that were completely unable to see paradigm shifts that permanently affecting its industry. The United State national security is at risk due to our dependence on oil from the most volatile regions in the world and when the US is at risk, major changes occur. You will find little sympathy from the average American who watches you close plants and lay-off workers while Toyota and Honda build new plants and hire workers. GM needs fresh ideas and you keep singing the same old song.
Dear Mr. Lutz:
I was watching your interview on CBS Sunday Morning television show. What GM along with the other American auto makers can’t seem to understand, is that American consumers are tired of spending their hard earned dollars on automobiles that are cheaply made and unreliable. You may think that GM is catching up on quality, but you are mistaken. Consumers want value for their dollars, not a flashy car that has to go to the shop all the time.
Bob,
Keep up the great work.
With your help, GM can
turn this around.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
My wife and I bought a GMC Envoy in 2002 with the I-6 motor and absolutely love the SUV. We want to buy a 2008 or future Envoy but want one with the GM 6L80 automatic transmission. Please, please make it available with the I-6 and we will buy one! The Acadia offers the six speed automatic but does not offer rear wheel drive. The I-6 is a fabulous motor and with the 6L80 it’s an outstanding combination. Thank you for considering this. With admiration and respect.
Bob,
I really don’t think the message is getting thru to the general public with regards to the turnaround of General Motors. The people here in Indianapolis that I’ve talked with (Joe Public) don’t really seem to care what GM is doing. Some even get upset even talking about the GM turnaround. Young people today look back at the old name plates on GM cars and remember …. oh that’s the model my granddad drove years ago. I don’t want an old man’s car. GM’s small cars have to run on a half a quart of motor oil without blowing up as Toyota small cars do. I had a young guy tell me that you can abuse a Toyota and they keep on running. Years ago Toyota took alot of interest in building small cars. At a time when GM had the Vega. Let’s face it Vega was a bomb. Alot of GM’s small cars were bombs. Back in the early 90’s I jumped on the GMC bandwagon…. I still do. I just bought a 2007 model. Great Truck !!! During these years I saw the GM car models slipping away. In 1999 I had to get a loaner car from my Chevy dealer. I drove a new Malibu. I was shocked !!!! My feeling for the car was cheap, cheap, cheap. I had been out of the car market for nine years and I couldn’t believe the direction the car had taken. The 08 Camero should have been a 07…. A little slow Bob. I won’t be a General Motors employee much longer as my plant is on sale block…. Allison Transmission. I don’t think Detroit realizes how much the Allison personal are pro GM. More so than any other GM location. We worked hard to get Allison’s were it’s at today. Someday Bob GM will have to draw a line in the sand and stop cutting arms and legs off. Good luck Bob…..
Dear Mr. Lutz
I am a retiree from GM/Delphi. I am driving a Freightliner Sprinter van in a delivery business. I wanted to buy a Chevy or GMC to help the pension check. But they are too small. I have seen the Opel Movano online. I would sure like to give my money to GM instead of DimelerCrysler. Any chance of importing the Movano into the US. I think there would be a market.
Mr. Lutz,
Just saw you on Fox News, you were constantly being asked “what’s the deal, why is GM not performing like foreign cars”, you claimed it was bad press. Perhaps to a small degree, that is correct. Let me share with you my conversations with other in my age group, age 44. We grew up with GM, Ford and Dodge muscle cars, my Olds Cutlass, with over 150,000 miles never failed me.
However, we saw all that change in the 80’s and early 90’s and during this time all American automakers put out, let’s say it, crap. This is the reason we the buying public have steered away from American Automakers. Moreover than bad press, if what you claim that American made cars are of high quality and will last over 100,000 miles like my Toyota’s have, then I believe the American automakers need to do some heavy duty marketing and advertising asking the American public to trust your product and that American prided and workmanship is back.
This may mean that you need to one up your competition and stand by your product with better and longer warranty’s, until there is a trust that your products are every bit as good.
The bottom line, with me and many others I have talked with is after the 80’s and 90’s there is a lack of trust in your product.
I for one would love to come back to American made autos but don’t want to risk the high cost of buying a car only to find they won’t last as long as my Toyota.
Mr. Lutz,
Just want to let you know that Chevrolet is out of touch with it pickup truck owners. Let me explain. My father-in-law has been a Chevy man for 50 plus years, buying a new pick up every 10-12 years. His last new purchase was a 1992 C3500 Extended Cab Long Box with a 350 and a 5 speed manual transmission. It now has about 300,000 miles on it and he went shopping for a new Chevy pickup last week, however the local dealer could not sell him one. You see, he wants a manual transmission, but you don’t sell any 2007 C3500 pickups trucks with manual transmissions. So he goes to the Dodge dealer, same thing, no manual transmission. Now, myself, I prefer Ford pickups, so I go to Ford and guess what, that new 2008 F350 SuperDuty has killer looks with a MANUAL transmission. Now I just have to convert a diehard Chevy man to the big Blue Oval.
If Dale Earnhardt, Jr or Tony Stewart or Kevin Harvick or Jeff Gordan or Kyle Bush or Jimmy Johnson or Jeff Burton or any of the top 15 Chevy NASCAR drivers came up to you and said, Bob, I am looking for a pickup with a MANUAL transmission, you guys’ would have it parked in their driveway over night.
Auto manufactures needs to understand, not everyone wants an automatic transmission. Would the Z06 be the hit it is if it only came with an automatic? I don’t think so. I really don’t care for the Automatic in my 1995 Indy Pace Car Corvette but I really like the Car and the LT1. I really like the Super T-10 4 speed manual transmission in my 1978 Indy Pace Car Corvette and my 1979 Tenth Anniversary Trans Am and the ZF 6 speed manual transmission in my 2002 Ford F350 CC SuperDuty!
Who cares that market research shows 97% of the people prefer automatics. You need to look out for the 3% that want to shift themselves; the rest of the people will take what is on the lot.
Sincerely,
Greg Hoyer
Dear Sir:
I had occasion to rent a new G6 from Budget the other
day over a two day period and was tremendously
impressed by this very fine car.
The one thing that was bad about the car was the
steering wheel which had a very cheap feel about it.
The most intimate part of a car a driver feels is the
steering wheel and I hope you don’t mind me saying to
you that if you change the wheel or wrap a tailored
leather cover around it, your sales will boom. As it
is the feel is so cheap that I thought my 1991 Alfa
164 felt better overall than the G6 until I realised
that it was the steering wheel that was letting the
car down.
I congratulate you on a fine addition to the Pontiac
family, my own family has owned Pontiacs from a
Bonneville 1950s, in Sri Lanka and in 1970s Africa,
where a desperately adored Grand Prix, will never fade
from my mind. It used to fishtail when automatically
changing from 1st to 2nd! Delightful car.
I wish more Americans would realise how really good
American cars are again and have been for more than 10
years.
Feizal Mansoor
Sri Lanka
currently visiting the US.
Mr. Lutz,
First let me congratulate you on the vision you’ve displayed in the Chevy Volt concept vehicle. I think that the time is right for the introduction of electric cars that not only put this country on the road to energy independence, but also start to address the global warming issue head on!
As a frame of reference, I have owned GM vehicles for over 35 years now, including high performance vehicles from the 60’s (’67 SS396 Chevelle, ‘69 Z-28 and many more).
I would encourage you to research the following vehicles thoroughly before finalizing the engineering on the Volt and other Electric Vehicles to allow GM to get the best possible option to us.
The Tesla electric sportscar has been getting some great press and has acheived a level of performance unheard of in electric vehicles before, at an operating cost that is unbelievable. They have been able to achieve the equivalent to .01 per mile (or approx. 135+ miles per gallon at current prices)while achieving a 0-60 time of 4 seconds(that’s that I’m talkin about)!!!
The second vehicle is the ZAP-X…http://www.zapworld.com/ZAPWorld.aspx?id=4560…..this is similar in performance and operating cost to the Tesla but in a different Crossover configuration. The beauty of the ZAP-X is that you can recharge in 10 minutes, thus eliminating the need for multi-fuel backup powerplant (or using it as the recharging station while on the road).
I think that from an engineering and technology perpective, that these vehicles represent the future of electric cars. Imagine being able to able to go back to the equivalent of .30 cents per gallon of gas…imagine the decrease in greenhouse gasses…imagine the increase in discretionary income and the postive effect that would have on our economy. I know you HAVE imagined all of these things and are implemeting your vision for them.
Now, the old gearhad in me still likes the rumble of the GTO exhaust, but the performance of these new electric vehicles can approach and even surpass the old “Glory Days” of the muscle car!!
I know that you, and the brilliant engineers at GM stay abreast of all the news related to these new developments…I just wanted to express my enthusiasm for GM’s direction related to the Volt as well as my opinion on newer developments that should be considered before taking the Volt and other Electric cars into production. I think by utilizing some of these newer technolgies on the Skateboard platform, you can revolutionize the way we buy, customize and drive our vehicles.
Thank you for providing the forum in which to get these thoughts out to you.
Regards,
Ken
Mr. Lutz,
I have owned a ‘98 jeep wrangler (love it) but have upgraded to a ‘06 Pontiac G6 coupe. I have enjoyed this car up until I wrecked it on Valentine’s Day, someone t-boned me in the mall parking lot. That’s not where the problem comes in. It has been in the shop ever since. It has been through 3 QUARTER PANELS for the passenger side. NONE of them fit. I’m just concerned because I know it costs money to make those panels, but money and time is being wasted if it doesn’t fit as a replacement. Please let me know what I should do next.
Just heard Bob on NPR’s “Wait, Wait — Don’t Tell Me!” He expressed his desire to mass produce The Volt. I’m expressing my desire to purchase it. So what is Detroit waiting for? Wait, wait — don’t tell me.
Mr Lutz, First of all, I’d like to thank you for all you’ve done for the automobile industry. More importantly, the Zeta platform and the Chevelle. Has it been discussed behind closed doors as a possible re-release of the Chevelle.I say this because alot of the folks I talk to in the performance industry say “I wish GM would bring back the Chevelle”. And the current GTO owners don’t want to see that because the Chevelle outclassed them in 1966 with the mark IV BBC’s. They don’t want to see that happen again. But those of us Chevrolet fans would buy them up in a heartbeat because of the love and history of this model. You stated in Auto week recently that the Impala and Monte Carlo lines are going to be replaced. Can you say or hint at this time, as what new model,and what impact will it have on North American Motorsports such as NASCAR where the Monte Carlo is the longest winning model in the history of NASCAR, and the Impala has already won every COT NASCAR event this season.I’m not a big Camero fan, but I do thank GM for bringing back the Camero becuase of the love so many Americans have for it.
Kind Regards
Rocky
Dear Mr. Lutz:
In 1954, I was stationed in Casual Company, Headquarters and Service Battalion, Parris Island, South Carolina.
A friend of mine, whose name was Bob Lutz and was from Switzerland, was there at the same time. He was just out of boot camp and was a PFC.
Are you the same Bob Lutz?
Emil Roman
I read your article about debut the Volt car. The price is $30,000 to go 40 miles on a charge.Remember the 78 electric cars you people killed in 2003,Duh. It could have been your revival instead of your death.Try watching the movie who killed the electric car again and maybe you will get the point.
Mr Lutz.
You obviously have alot of experiemce in the automobile industry and its interesting you are a fellow aviator, and I hope you still share this passion. As a private pilot reliability is everything as your life may very well depend upon it. Well, purchasing a new car is similar. That is why some who have struggled financially during the earlier years, and the challenges of wrenching on your own is a requisite. Usually when the first opportunity arises to buy new one days. Well I recently bought a new 2007 Saturn Ion Quad in the color black, my favorite.Only to dicover in three weeks paint problems. Much to the credit of honoring the thirty day exchange I was given another one (at a cost to me) delivered July 13th, 2007.Of course I picked black because lighting could not stike twice!!Not so same problem. So what people want is simple, no problems. Now Saturn tells me the problem is the color, not the paint?
I will love GM till I die…I wonder who will go first, me or them. I’m only about 60 so I think I may outlast you. GM could have owned the car world..something went terribly wrong!
Wow, I thought GM was in trouble…not any more! Now I Know it is! I won’t bore you with the many problems I have had with the last 4 new Chevy’s we bought in the last 7 or 8 years. I have been very stubborn and refused to look at the truth, but after listening to some response video thing about GM car reliability by Bob Lutz, well you guys are doomed. I don’t see any way out for GM at this point. Where did all the smart people go?
The Greatest loss Chrysler suffered was when Bob Lutz was Passed over in favor of Bob Eaton as Chief operating officer of Chrysler.
The GTO from Holden may have been a failer but Bob is passionate to bring greatness back to GM like the 1960`s. I`m a big 3 fan. My freedom I credit to the surviving American auto industry from the WWII days.RIP STudebaker Bantum Willys and others. Good Dealer service is what GM needs to focus on now. I wish Bob were 40 years younger so GM could have him longer
I want to thank Bob Lutz for his direction and insight at this most critical time for GM and the auto industry. His recent comments on Autoline Detroit announcing the dawn of the “electrification of the automobile” were most encouraging and exciting. As the son and grandson of GM employees I support his efforts and encourage others to do so as well.
My suggestion is to apply the eflex technology to a racing program to assist in the marketing much as Audi has done with the TDI R10 ALMS program. Thanks for listening.
Dear Bob Lutz, I have a few ideas for you.
Don’t sell electric cars with battery packs; make the battery pack easy to change, like camara battery. Think of it as a 1300 lb vcr tape.
You pull the car up to a “pump”, slide your credit card, battery pack is changed out in 60 seconds. The credit card is charged for the prorated life of the battery, ie: the price of battery pack divided by recharges. Lets say $6000/3000=$2 per charge + a fee for the charge $6. So for $8 you can drive 60 mile, that is $.13 per mile.
Next Idea.
Hydrogen cars, don’t store the Hydrogen, make it on demand. Work on a more efficient electrolizer. With modern digital control and coils, water can be broken down fast enough to do this. Electrical pulses like a hammer drill can break apart the bonds easier than a constant voltage. It isn’t the amperage which brake the bonds, it is the voltage. Try a million volts, not 12.
You can burn the hydrogen or Browns gas.
Idea three.
make the electric car. The electric can be from a battery pack, fuel cell or from a generator which is ran by a gas turbine. The turbine can be very small, the size of a turbocharger, it can be ran on the gas of choice, Hydrogen, o2, o1, Browns gas, methane, alkahol…
Idea four.
If you are in a political bind and need to use infrastructure, build a massive electrolizer which is water turbine driven. You would have the source of water and electricity. Can be by falling water, or better by, by the Gulf Stream, which is close, strong, and fast just off of the coast of South Florida.
Feel free to contact me if you want to discuss in detail any of these ideas.
Doug Fleck
I live and work in Michigan, and therefore have always been a proponent of American made cars. It is sad for me to see us lose out to Asian and European competitors. My question has always been, why? Then I went into the local
Cadillac dealership and asked the salesperson what new technologies, including “green” initiatives that were roling out in ‘08 and she said nothing green, and that Cadillac customers are not interested in the social responsibility that comes with fuel economy or were willing to pay for new technologies that would produce less carbon, and I was left thinking “Why would GM invest in it’s low cost platforms to introduce cutting edge innovation? Do I choose between a Saturn or a Chevy?
Mr. Lutz,
I just wanted to drop you a line (if you read this at all) regarding the 2008 Chevy Malibu. I currently own a 2000 Malibu LS, have almost 98000 miles on it, and think it’s a great car. It’s been worth every penny of the $16K I purchased it for brand new (the original sticker was a tick over $21K, and the epa estimates were 20/30). It has some quirks, but for the most part, I’d do it again in 2000…but not for 2008.
I’m very disappointed in the new ‘08 Malibu, in that the much talked about 4 cylinder / 6 speed combo will only come out in the top of the line LTZ model, and sometime in Spring of ‘08, most likely later than that. The EPA estimates are also simular to the 2000 V6…so there’s no reason for me to spend X amt of dollars for a new car if I don’t get better gas mileage.
Going by what the pricing website quoted, a LTZ starts at $24K. Unless there’s something I don’t see, the 4 cylinder version should be at least a grand less.
The also much hyped choices for interior only have outragous color choices for the LTZ. I just want the black charcoal ebony interior with silver trim that can be had on the LT1 and LT2 models.
It also seems like backpedaling on the original premise that there would be so many different combinations that could be had.
And offering a mild hybrid isn’t going to cut it. This is the 21st century, and we need a car that gets about 40 MTG in the city, without sacrificing size or horsepower to get there. My 170 hp v-6 gets me where I need to go, and the 4 cylinder engines seem to be at the same levels of hp.
How will GM start winning over Customers who can get a more fuel efficient, better economic valued car when GM will still be higher priced? I really want to buy American, but unless there’s something more reasonably priced for my family and I, we’re going to have to look at other Foreign autos.
You’ve said that the Malibu is the car that will turn GM around. Lower the price and it will. Don’t and it won’t.
Purchased a 2009 Malibu 2LT several weeks ago. This is the 2.4 cylinder version with your tap shift six speed automatic (which I discovered the excellence of in our 2007 Saturn XE AWD).
In July 2007 we traded our 1999 Saturn SL-1 on the Outlook. Could not be any happier with the Outlook, but we wanted something with more SL-1 like fuel economy for the daily commute to and from work. The Aura was the car I really wanted, but we know where Saturn is heading.
Yes, the Malibu 2LT had a delivered window sticker price of $27,310 delivered at Eisinger Motors in Kalispell, MT. But after putting 1,500 miles on the car I can state without hesitation that it is worth every cent—and then some—that we paid for it.
The Malibu has done it. Gone is my longing for the SL-1 every now and then when I fill up (the Outlook) with gas. Our Malibu has more legroom, is far better looking, accelerators better, is much quieter, has better road holding (not subject to being pushed around by high sidewinds), corners much better, and has fuel economy that is superb considering everything else the car does.
I’m a former Navy corpsman (1970-1971) who spent half my adult life in the Rover and Land Rover business. I’m the guy who wrote to Iacocca and suggested that Chrysler purchase Land Rover Limited in 1985. I left the Rover business on 1 January 1986. For the record, I find the Outlook a vastly superior product to the Range Rover. Hopefully you GM guys will get GM back into the private sector and off all federal handouts ASAP so you don’t follow in the footsteps of British Leyland. I’ve lost no tears having left that business.
For Mr. Lutz and all the folks at GM, I’ll conclude by stating that our three GM products, the SL-1, the Outlook, and now the Malibu, are exceptional. Keep up the good work. The reliability of all three of these cars has been second to no other vehicle I’ve ever owned—and I’m 61 years old.
Semper Fidelis & anchors aweigh, Andy McKane, Missoula, MT, 8 August 2009
Mr. Lutz,
Please don’t skip this comment. It’s short. Electric cars like the Volt will need creative financing schemes to make them work. Just like with the EV1, please consider going to a lease model where a person can drive off the lot for something like $400 a month. Then the owner can see how much they’re saving in gasoline per month more starkly. If they have to pony up 30 grand for a small car, you might not get enough early adopters because they won’t see the advantages of cheap electricity against petroleum.
God bless you, sir… you’re one of the best helmsmen for GM in years!
Ralph Taite
Hello Mr. Lutz,
One question…At the risk of sounding like Simon Cowell of American Idol:
Are you as tired of Losing ground to Toyota as I am of hearing about it ?
Not sure of any other way of making contact with you, so I will do it in your Blog.
If GM wants a great advantage over Toyota/Honda and others in the PHEV market, then I have the Concept that will do just that…and more.
It can be done quickly and relatively…let’s just say, simply. Yet, it will have a tremendous impact.
Is there a better way of making contact with the proper persons who might want to hear what it is ?
I hope the best in the future for GM…”This is our Country” is not just a Ad Slogan.
Best Regards, B.S. LA, Ca.
Bob Lutz, I want to thank you for so clearly stating the truth about global warming and its peddlers-global warming is otherwise known to thinking people as the continued eb and flow of climate over ions of time.
Yes !! Bob. Global warming is a crock. You are my new hero. Keep telling it like it is, and don’t let the lefties wear you down. If you keep this up, my next Ford will be a Chevy. Thanks for having the balls to stand up to those “s*** for brains” girly-men.
Hey Bob,
I just read where you said global warming is a “crock of ****”. It’s thinking of that nature that has lead to the demise of GM. It will lead to the demise of all of us in the long run. You might want to bone up on the science and reconsider. A man of you position has a responsibility to the facts, as your influence flows far and wide.
As regards Mr. Lutz’s comment that Global Warming is a crop, we have cyclical climate changes but there has been no scientific evidence that there is any tie between man and such changes. Those,who argue contra, are those who believe in scientifc consensus rather than scientific proof. Build cars that people want, and they buy them. Buy cars that government shoves down your throat, get ready to answer to the Share Holders. Hang in there.
Mr. Lutz: Right on, global warming is the biggest hoax ever played on the world. Chicago is having is coldest and longest winter in memory and five times the snow it had last year. What a crock of horse hockey it is. Thanks for speaking out.
Thank you Mr. Lutz! It takes common sense and courage to speak truth to the followers of the Global Warming religion.
Genuine science warns we are entering an ICE AGE.
Climate change is a “crock of ****”? C’mon Bob! You can’t be that blind or obtuse.
We’ve s*** in our own nest and this is part of the penalty. Deal with it.
Dear Mr. Lutz,
Thank You, for speaking out about the tripe being foisted upon us by the “green” movement. It seems that thirty years ago it was the “red” movement. “Protected” workers in the peoples republics were not sufficiently greatful for the controls imposed on them for their own good, at the point of a gun.
It seems that the very same players have learned and now want to “protect” mother earth. Her voice can be manipulated by “adgenda science” I find interesting that the guns are still being pointed at us workers.
Anthropogenic Global Warming is a Fraud!
The principle greenhouse gas is water vapor. It is responsible for 99.875% of all atmospheric warming, but is ignored by government because it cannot be controlled or taxed.
3% of air is water vapor and 0.038% is CO2. In terms of molecules, there are 193 times as many water molecules in air as CO2.
Each water molecule absorbs four times as much infrared heat energy as every CO2 molecule. Thus, water vapor has 772 times the effect of CO2 or 99.875% of all absorption.
The anthropogenic global warming panic pushers have found something to tax and control. It’s just that simple.
Adrian Vance
I suspect the “global warming” issue is intended to eventually tax the developed nations so they’ll “share” more with the “developing” (read Third World) nations.
Since June 2003, I’ve been employed by the Forest Service in western Montana. These days there is a policy to “let it burn” or to use “controlled burns” in our forests. (Two years ago four or five of the retired Chiefs, US Forest Service wrote and stated that in the eight years prior to that we had an 80 percent reduction of logging on Forest Service land.) I suggest this greatly reduced logging, coupled to the “let it burn” policy is almost certainly the reason our fires are getting larger and more expensive to fight.
Think of all the emissions one large forest fire puts into the atmosphere!
I’m not a forester, and I’m not a scientist. But I have zero belief in the global warming hoax.
Andy McKane, Missoula, Montana, 2152, Saturday, 8 August 2009
Mr. Lutz,
I agree with your comments. I’m glad that GM engineers don’t rely on the same *scientific* methods that global warmists do to determine whether its cars are safe (i.e. 50 years of *data* out of a few billion years of no data have solidified it for hardcore global warmists). Real scientists would lose their jobs and/or be the laughing stock of their peers with such claims of impending doom based on skewed data. Please continue using sound engineering methods to design cars rather than the Al Gore technique of cutting corners to support a bogus theory.
At last someone of note stands up to the lunacy of “Global warming”. There are two sides to
every story but so far only one side has been allowed to reach
the public ear. The sky is falling, says Al Gore, and the hen house goes crazy. Thanks
Bill Lutz for taking a stand against
the fear mongers.
Bob,
You’re right on target with your comment about global warming being a crock. There’s no science to back it up, only false awards for algore. Those of us who can think for ourselves can’t ignore the fact that they’ve dropped the “global warming” moniker and jumped on the “climate change” bandwagon. That helps them explain why the natural cycle is beginning to cool the earth again. Back in the 1970’s algore was on the “global cooling” schtick, but it seems that inventing the internet made him and so many others much smarter.
BTW, kudos to GM on the new Malibu. Looks like a winner.
Mr. Lutz, regarding the global warming hoax. Please do not back down from those who will try to ruin you. The global warming issue is a total hoax. History proves, over and over, that climate changes are a natural ebb and flow on this Planet. Society needs people who will stand up to the enviro-pagans and stick the finger of truth and facts in their eye. Maybe, someday, the media will take a few minutes to look at the facts and then expose the truth. It’s called the Sun, the Oceans, the jet stream et-al.
ask the eskimos if climate is changing.
whether natural or man made,
something is going on.
deny the obvious and toyota will still be eating your lunch for years to come.
if padding your pockets is more important than the enviroment your future generations live in ,
keep up your polluting ways
(hey a billion chinese in cars will bring changes nobody can imagine)
Why put out products you don’t believe in? No wonder your company is dragging its feet. GM is following instead of leading. What a shame and a step down from former days of glory.
Mr. Lutz
I too agree that the Global warming histaria is a fraud. If you want to turn the auto industry around you have to now only make the vehicles more fuel efficient but easier and simpler to work on. The average person with mechanically ability should be able to change the spark plugs with out tilting and engine, replace ingnition wires, belts, alternator, fuel pump and fuel filter without having to go to a dealer or mechanic. In the mid 90’s a professional car racer and engineer stated that if the U.S. auto industry does not make cars simpler by 2000, the U.S. auto industry is doomed. He is right. I mayself will not buy a new car. They are not worth it. I know you have been subjected to a lot of government regulations, but the fact is you need to fire all of your engineers and hire new ones. Before a car is put on the market the engineers themselves should be able to do basic maintainance on the vehicles such as I mentioned earlier.
Thank you
“Hydrogen cars, don’t store the Hydrogen, make it on demand. Work on a more efficient electrolizer. With modern digital control and coils, water can be broken down fast enough to do this. Electrical pulses like a hammer drill can break apart the bonds easier than a constant voltage.” by Douglas Fleck
Mr Fleck,
Any car that could carry enough electrical energy to “make hydrogen on demand” could run more efficiently on that electrical energy alone.
There would be no reason to use that electricity to make hydrogen and undergo the inevitable thermodynamic and conversion losses.
Mark said: “Before a car is put on the market the engineers themselves should be able to do basic maintenance on the vehicles…”
Absolutely correct Mark, but let’s go one step further: Mr Wagoner and Mr Lutz should have to demonstrate they can personally change the spark plugs (except diesels), belts, and oil on every model GM makes before it can go on a showroom floor. (Sometimes it seems the engineers who designed the cars must be in cahoots with the dealer maintenance people. Otherwise, why would they make it so hard to do basic maintenance?)
The annual auto shows at Detroit, Chicago, and New York would be a great place for Wagoner and Lutz to demonstrate the ease of maintenance of GM models. I even bet it would be a big attendance draw. (I know the press would love it.)
Heck, we might as well go all the way and also require the CEOs and senior VPs of all the auto companies be able to show they can drive a car with a manual transmission at those same auto shows.
Best,
Gary Dikkers
Mr. Lutz:
While you are entitled to your personal position regarding global warming, a careful review of all the available evidence by most of the world’s scientists has come to a contrary position. True, there are some scientists who challenge CO2’s role in global warming just as there were scientists who for more than three decades contended, against the great weight of scientific evidence, that smoking was not harmful to health while three million Americans died of cancer. Notwithstanding your personal position, does GM have a corporate position recognizing the automobile’s contribution to Global Warming? If not, I’m afraid that I can no-longer purchase GM products. I just can’t have faith in any company that could be so uninformed against the great weight of world scientific thought. I have been an exclusive GM customer for more than 50 years and I currently own two GM vehicles. Please advise.
As typical, GM is multiple years late and billions short while the world moves towards small city cars like the Fiat 500 and Mini. GM’s response, why of course the Aveo, garbage on wheels.
The 2009 roll out of the second coming of the Camaro, all 2 tons of it is what the General thinks America is waiting for. Unbelievable. Sales will be brisk until the fading baby boomers have their fill and then the Camaro will be stacking up unsold on dealer lots within 3 years.
There is absolutely no coherent vision at GM nor any other Detroit based automaker. Midwest centric and removed from the reality of world of $4 per gallon and higher gasoline.
The latest news is that GM is evaluating the Mini concept, with a 4 year time horizon to possible production. Oh, swell. GM ponders while BMW sells. It’s just pathetic seeing another American ikon fall flat on it’s ass.
It sure was a great move by the GM brain trust to pay Fiat $2 billion to terminate the call option, just as Marchionne was about to turn Fiat into a winner. How about a trade,that is while he’s still breathing, Lutz for Marchionne.
Bob Lutz,
I am a retired GM skilled employee and a devout general motors truck and auto buyer, and always will be. My question to you is, Why is it when an exciting new product like the limited addition ZR1 is introduced, the devoted GM worker has little to no chance of buying one ? I am also a 40 year corvette enthusiast,and tried almost everywhare to buy one and was turned down. This has been my experience as always in the past as it has been when I have tried to purchase many other of the first off GM products. This includes the first and second generation Z06’s, the first of the Cadillac SLR and to say the least one of the first C-5’s. Whats more heartening than ever is finding out that the one’s that are promised these cars, are the same affluent
people that buy them to just make a profit. Also These individuals drive anything but GM vehicals because they think the high price european brands are the cars that are quote”the prestigious class” drives. What is it going to take for an average, GM enthsiast, to buy one of the first, if not the first ZR1 corvette’s produced. Thank You. Sincerly a true Corvette guy Jim
Mr. Lutz;
It just seems as though the malaise of the eighties is still around, and nobody @ GM Styling cares about ‘outside the box’ identity looks anymore. Most of the comments I’ve read have addressed this, but as a 30-year GM veteran, it pains me to agree. How can you sell bland, uninspired cars and expect high sales numbers? The cars that are excellent, not many can afford.Exclusivity can’t keep us above the waterline.
I am glad to see at least GM is starting to move in the right direction. It’s not that easy for a business to just up and change everything, you have to evaluate the costs and be concerned about loosing existing costumers. I hope GM will continue to move toward fuel savbing vehicles and alternative vehicles. I would be excited if the U.S. would be independant with its energy needs.
The time is now to make a difference and GM is the company that can do it.
I have faith in your GM, dont let America become a third world country
Dear Mr.Lutz,
You are indeed an expert and will remain so many years to come.Those sterliing qualities in you manifested earlier in life and you were able to hold on to them and in turn exhibited wonderful brillance and intelligence. Is GM doing anything deliberate to bring up someone like you educationally? By the way, are you a relation of Herbert Lutz?Let the cars keep rolling into Africa, the modern Canaan! Remain blessed.
Joe Johnson
Dear Bob Lutz,
I don’t pretend to know something about electric cars that GM doesn’t know. But GM data that I have seen suggest that the Chevy Volt doesn’t have to be so far in the future. The Chevy Volt is said to be waiting for battery technology to catch up to Volt vehicle requirements. Why not just reduce the performance potential of the Volt from 120 kilowats (160HP) down to 53 kilowats (Volt’s alternator capacity). That provides about 70HP at a level the alternator can sustain indefinitely without stopping for a recharge. No new battery technology is required if the car can run on its alternator. As battery technology improves the performance of the Volt can be improved. The question remains: (at the Volt’s weight) will 70HP provide adequate performance? If not, hop up the alternator/engine a bit.
I would like to see GM shortcut the process and get Volt on the road.
Max Limpert
As soon as the VOLT is available I will buy one ….
even if it is going to be $40K
GM needs to start producing the EV1 again. I have shown the demo videos to many of my friends and relatives. Many have asked where they can buy one.
I get so mad sometimes when I have to tell them they were all crushed.
GM had the impact (predecessor to the EV1) developed back in 1990. Go to youtube and seach for impact ev1 and watch the video update GM produced. The car was and is still the most advanced vehicle ever made.
The VOLT will be a complete flop. Toyota has already had GM’s lunch there. GM needs to bring back the EV1 NOW.
To think almost two decades have gone by and GM has introduced NOTHING to replace the EV1 that has the same range and does not need gas.
Come on GM. What will it take for you to build the EV1? America needs an EV not another hybrid that burns fuel. Will you wait for Tesla motors, Nissan and other auto manufacturers to capitalize on the all electric vehicle industry that GM pioneered?
Mr. Lutz
Congratulations on the ZR1 and CTS V Nurburgring records. You have done wonders with GM’s products since you arrived. Do me one more favor…don’t let GM die, times aren’t good right now and GM needs great leadership to pull it through.
Thanks,
Anthony
Mr. Lutz;
I have been a GM (Chevrolet) customer for decades, currently with a Suburban daily driver and three Corvettes. With the fuel situation, both price (devalued dollar)and supply (?) I would love to see the Nomad design studies of a few years ago produced with an Eco tec and 6 speed auto and 6 speed manual. Mileage in the low-mid 30’s is a good interval until alternate fuel is developed. As previously a Fortune 10 Marketing Dir. and Product Development Dir. I would project more success with that vehicle than the Toyota Xb with a broader customer base—and you already have the platform! Toyota misjudged their target market but you won’t. Youth plus Baby Boomers alike is a pretty good base of potential buyers. The Cobalt is ready for a small utility/wagon and so is the the market. How about a 4 cylinder Equinox?
I’m sending you this suggestion because in my youth I was passionate about GM cars. I defected to Toyota in the 80’s, for a simple, easy-to maintain car with better gas mileage, but I’m sentimental.
GM needs to recover from the consequences of pouring gas-guzzling behemoths down America’s throat. The country is regurgitating, big-time. But one of your wiser decisions, if you went back to it, could make you enough money and breathing space to recover.
My idea is this: start making the GEM again. Make an enclosed 2-seater model with room enough for a small amount of cargo. Sell them to the car-rental companies as “downtown cars” that they can rent by the hour to public-transit commuters. This concept is catching on quickly as “car-share” programs, and in some cities entrepreneurs wrap gas or electric scooters in car bodies, and make money renting them. The rental companies will be happy and order more. Also, there are lots of individuals like me, whose driving includes lots of local errands, who’d gladly buy one if they don’t cost an arm and a leg. (I, for one, would give up at least a toe or two…)
You may not get the per-unit profit you get on a Hummer, but how many Hummers can you sell to people who spend more on gas than we do on food?
If you wanted to be really clever, you could augment the charge range of the little beasties by putting solar cells on the roof…
Mr. Lutz;
One of your fans here. Guts was sometimes very humorous but sadly the descriptions of policy and leadership at Chrysler read much like many other companies including those for which I was employed. Everyone recognizes that a company must make a profit in order to be self sustaining. The bottom line though often seems to ultimately come at the expense of the lesser concrete aspects of the viability of a company’s future.
Yesterday my 2001 Cavalier simply stopped running in the left lane of a busy metropolitan expressway during the evening rush hour.
I had to have it towed at great expense due to the towing laws in he area that designate exclusivity of stretches of highway to particular towing companies.
I had the car towed to the garage of our local celebrity car expert and the fool car started after they put ten litres of fuel into the tank which knew to contain close to a quarter tank of gas.
The theory for the cause of the failure was that General Motors puts a short length of tubing onto the end of the pump suction pipe and it must have fallen off. The mechanic drives and old Celebrity and he knows that the piece has fallen off of his pump.
How can such a seemingly inconsequential part be put to a use that will
cause the car to be completely disabled in the event that it fails?
If someone could show me that the new CTS and the new Malibu had this component they would be immediatly removed from my list of desirable cars. This type of thing is typical of why North American industy is suffering. If there is no concrete rationale that justiifies paying a premium for something then buyer goes elsewhere. I have had faithful service from this car since November 05 when I bought it used. If there is more of this type of grief coming I won’t keep it long because I need it to make a living.
Carl Darlington
its vehicles are only part of the reason gm is losing market share. try dealing with gm customer service (not) or gmac. call either and prepare to wait 20 minutes before someone who might speak coherent english answers your call. then prepare for additional frustration from their incompetence. both of these divisions need to be cleaned up. maybe by changing the complete structure. my terrible experiences with these divisions are leading me away from gm. I have bought gm vehicles for 40 yrs.
“Hybrids are an interesting curiosity and we will do some,” “But do they make sense at $1.50 a gallon? No, they do not.”
Visionary Lutz in 2004
[...] Yup, Tom Peters had his hand in the Aztec but design was not the priority as it is now under Lutz. The Camaro wins as a [...]
Hi Bob:
I’m sure you have seen T. Boone Pickens promoting his plan to reduce our reliance on foreign oil both on TV and recently when he testified before congress. As GM announces the closure of its truck and SUV plants in the US, I have to wonder why GM hasn’t promoted its CNG Bi-Fuel vehicles to the general public instead of just fleet sales. With Honda’s promotion of their Civic GX with the convenience of the Phill home CNG appliance they have realized there is a market for CNG vehicles in the US. Americans love their truck and SUV vehicles and at around $2.50 a gallon would continue to purchase them.
As the son and grandson of GM employees, I die a bit when I see GM taking a hit as they are now. I feel GM has lacked the vision of its competitors. You are the visionary and we are counting on you.
Sincerely,
Joseph Arkeder
Hi Mr. Lutz,
I’m listenening to you speaking to Charly Rose at the moment and would like to know why hasn’t anyone considered incorporating solar panels into the roofs of Hybrid and Electric vehicles as a battery charger during the daylight hours. I have three automotive patents and very interestd in the Volt and can’t wait to see them soon. I remember seeing a race in Austrailia using solar panels on there roofs of electric vehicles that traveled long distances. When properly designed into the roofs to prevent theft this component will become another addition to the new technology. Thank you for providing me this forum for my imput.
I was very disappointed with the debut of the final version of the Volt. What happened to the beautiful prototypes that we have been looking at for the last nine months or so? This new version looks like a Toyota Priuus. If I wanted a Priuus, I would already be driving a Priuus.
TO R & D I have an ingenious way to charge vehicle batteries, while at relatively slow speeds of up to 20+ mph. I have been trying to get in touch with someone at your R & D department to no avail. This technology that I have developed is done with already existing technology and is relatively cheap to implement. I think it would be very useful on the Volt platform to help increase the cars non-charged mileage from approx. 40 miles to about 60-80miles without plugging in to the wall outlet. Please have someone contact me so that i can get into details about what it is that can be done. Thanks.
Hallo Mr Lutz
Visiting the Opel Germany web-site i found the Safira CNG car offered. T. Boone has convinced me of wanting to switch from my VW diesels (3 in the famely) to CNG’s. How can i buy these Opel cars here in Utah. I would gladly fly over to Germany to take dilivery and bring them back myself.
That is exactly how i fell for the VW diesels, drove one on a vacation in Germany in 2003. Now the
Dealers are asking 3000 + premiums for the new models and that i won’t pay.
i thank you for being able to contact you and hope to be able to get an Opel CNG as my next run about car.
Thank you again, Detlef
Wow…it’s just amazing that so many 60 year olds have figured out how to use the Internet.
First, as far as global warming being a hoax…whether it is or isn’t, don’t we all agree that carbon monoxide is a deadly gas (i.e. committ suicide by closing your garage door, firing up your gasoline powered vehicle and breath normally until dead). Why would anyone suggest that we continue to build automobiles that release that crap into our atmosphere…how about the smog that hangs over our cities and floats into our national parks destroying the view of distant vistas…how about the black soot that covers our national monuments, historic landmarks and falls from the sky when it rains?? Certainly not all of this is from automobiles, but why would we want to continue to make cars that emit this crap when it’s CERTAINLY within our grasp to make it go away.
GM learns nothing. GM is a huge, bloated organization that can’t get out of it’s own way. I’m certain there are some brilliant, brilliant people at GM who could contribute far more to the future of the auto industry if they weren’t stuck in a archaic organization. The best thing that could happen to GM is if the company followed the path of Chysler…starting over with it’s best, winning assets – having the opportunity to restructure it’s labor, liabilities and become more competitive.
As for the government bailout, I’d no sooner support giving GM’s management a bailout any more than I would support giving a drunk beer money. It would be far more beneficial to the future of this country for the government to give $30B to Tesla Motors. In fact, the government should ask Tesla what they would do with $30 Billion….I’m certain they wouldn’t use it to build a gasoline powered anything. Tesla would likely use the money to invest in technology that would do nothing but move this country FORWARD…rather than using it to make payroll on the Cadilac Escalade production line.
I had a small business that was relatively successful, we rose to the top of our game in our industry just as GM. We held that place for several years…a couple of years later after some bad decisions it failed putting many people out of work. I failed because we made bad hiring decisions – leading to missed customer expectation, let expense get too far ahead of revenue and failed to eliminate ‘the wrong’ people. When we failed I didn’t have the option of going to the bank, the market or the government and asking for a loan. To start over, I had look deep into the reasons for my failure, leverage my remaining assets and restart on a better, more sustainable path. I would never want to go through shutting down a business again, but certainly learned from the mistake.
Hmmmm …What’s good for Tesla, is good for America?
Bob,
I have followed your success for many years and hope GM got you in time to save the grand old American brand, just as you did Chrysler Motors long ago. Remember our days as PFCs in the Marine Barracks, Pensacola, and NavCads in Class 14-55? You introduced me to sports cars with your old MG and you may recall I accompanied you as a half-arsed navigator at a couple of road rallies in Alabama! I see you flew the A-4, as did I (only the B model, though). Loved the Scooter, though my favorite was the F-8, which I flew for 7 years. But I learned from all the others, too. Props and jets; single- and multi-engine. Do you remember when you would draw a portion of an old aircraft and challenge me to ID it? Who but we could recognize the nose section of that old Messerschmitt-bait, the MS-406?? I went back to college and fooled enough professors to get a BSME and an MBA. Turned down American Airlines, Pan Am, and Air America (yes, that one!) and confined the bulk of my limited civilian flying to fire fighting in WW II types (e.g., TBM, A-26, B-25) while I was in college. Worked mostly as an engineer, project and functional manager, and private mangement/technical consultant for the Navy, the Office of the Sec of the Army, and a number of private sector companies. By the way, I am in complete agreement with you vis-a-vis “global warming”, as are most real climate scientists. Luck and success to you, “Herr Lutz”, from your old classmate and fellow SNJ survivor, ” Freddy” Robinson.
At this very moment I am watching Bob Lutz on 60 Minutes discussing the Chevrolet Volt. Because I believe in this country, and it’s potential to find success wherever needed, I am willing to bet on the success of the American-made car of the future.
A car that will cut our petroleum ties with the middle east, and set us free from oil’s cost to our pockets and our environemnt, is a car we most deperately need to find in our show-rooms. The sooner, the better.
My first car was a Chevy (a 1970 Malibu muscle car) that was handed down to me from my father. With any luck my last car will be a Chevy Volt.
From extreme gas guzzler, to extremely gas effiecient. When the Volt is ready for sale, I will be ready with my wallet.
2010. It won’t get here fast enough.
Bob – why make a Cadillac-style electric vehicle like the Volt? Why not introduce something more like the 4-door hatchback Toyota Yaris style vehicle in all electric. The market for electric vehicles is not looking for a Cadillac, they want a super efficient, easy to park 4-door hatchback. The Volt feels more like an ego piece than a practical electric vehicle solution that will have mass appeal. Or better yet, how about a plug-in diesel / electric hybrid in this style. Why not??
Just my 2 cents.
Thanks, Nate
Dear Mr. Lutz, ( I really hope you do read this)
I watched the segment on 60 minutes on electric cars and the interview with you with great interest.
A little background, I currently own two GM products, a ‘98 Yukon and a 2000 Chevy Express Van (conversion). I have never owned a Ford or Chrysler product – only GM, as far as big three American made automobiles. I loved my first GM car (1970 Olds Cutlass Supreme – who wouldn’t have). I have owned Toyota and Nissan Products and currently own a 2004 Toyota Prius. So, I am biased toward GM as American manufacturers go, but have also experienced of some of the fine Japanese brands on the market.
In reading the previous comments, I too believe in GM, however, I also think GM has been extremely short sighted over the last 30 year years regarding producing reliable and gas efficient automobiles. Unfortunately, GM also has been strapped with unbelievably high legacy expenses, which have recently come to roost, leading it into a very precarious financial state. Now, GM has asked the US Government for a 25 – 50 billion loan program (of which 25 billion has already been secured) to help “invest in new technology” for the future. OK, GM, so let’s retool, but not retrench.
I was very excited when you talked about the Chevrolet Volt, as I have been seeing sneaks and peeps of it over the last several weeks. However, when you started talking about the price, I was really taken back. I heard your remark that you started off thinking that you could produce and sell this vehicle below $20,000 and now think GM will have to price it at around $40,000 per copy.
My understanding is that the Volt will have a range of approximately 40 miles without a charge and will then need to have a small onboard gas engine to recharge the battery to go beyond the 40 mile limit without being plugged in to charge. You said in the interview that 78% of all trips are under 40 miles and therefore the 40 mile limit without a charge will satisfy most daily usage. Therefore, in my mind, this vehicle is primarily meant to be a commuter type vehicle, not an over the road vehicle.
I did not hear any details regarding over the road usage, as I’m sure the short interview did not allow for them or maybe these have not yet been worked out. However, I wanted to point out to you that if you are going to try to sell this car to the family of 4 as a daily commuter, you probably need to find a way to get the price into the 20,000 – 25,000 range to make it a practical and achievable selling vehicle.
My premise is based on being an owner of US and foreign made automobiles for over 30 years, and watching the US market wane and the foreign markets wax. It is also based on my experience as an owner of a Toyota Prius and on talking to many other vehicle owners and looking at the financial prospect for our country for the next 5 to 10 years.
As I’m sure that you are aware that the Prius sells in the range of 21,000 – 28,000, with the upper part of the range being a fully loaded leather seat and creature comfort laden vehicle. Most dealers are selling the Prius in my area (Washington, DC) at or above list price. I looked at a new Prius at a dealer recently and noticed it was selling for about $26,500 and it had comparable equipment to my 2004 model. When I bought mine in June of 2004, I was able to get it for approx. $500.00 below list which was $25,500.00, and it is fully loaded. When I bought the car in 2004 and gas was around $2.00 per gallon, some people told me I paid to much for a relatively small car that has a lot of gadgets with it and that I will never recoup the additional money I paid by trying to offset the cost with the gas savings. Since then, the average price of gas has soared and now it’s around $3.50 per gallon in my area, so I just smile whenever I see these people and they ask me how I like my Prius. I have calculated that I have saved approximately $5000.00 in 52 months in gas expenses over a car that averages 24 mpg, which is about the current national average for cars, so I am well on the way to saving $10,000.00 in gas expenses within the 8 year battery life warranty on this vehicle. The Prius consistnetly gets me about 44 mpg in the city and about 50 – 55 mpg on the road, and it is great as either a daily commuter or over the road vehicle for 4 people, and will seat 5 as well.
Also, Toyota says that they will have a plug in version of the Prius by 2010, with an estimate of $2000 – $3000 above the current Prius Price. The plug-in Prius will also have a gas engine and a range of approximately 35 – 40 miles on a 6-8 hour charge. However, and here is my major point, the price would still be around $10,000 less than the price you predicted for the Volt, which is also expected to be in the showrooms in 2010.
For sure, you will get some early adopters to pay $40,000, those who have been waiting for a US branded true electric or hybrid. But, given the financial shocks we all have taken recently and the prospect for a continuation of the current economic downturn dragging on, it would be wise for you and GM to look at ways to lower the end user price to a much more affordable range. You may have to look at a Spartan version of the Volt, without all the bells and whistles, just to get it out there on the street. I realize you run the risk of cheapening the image of the Volt if a base line version is available and looks cheap on the inside. However, GM must also take a hard look at what the competition already has out there, and the bar is set pretty high already.
Also, GM must make sure that the quality, fit and finish and everything about the new Volt is absolutely top notch.
I think Americans will LOVE the idea of GM producing a plug-in electric vehicle that will help us gain energy independence and help support our national security by making us less dependent on foreign energy sources. However, it’s got to be affordable to the average buyer or it won’t sell. The people who have the money to buy their Teslas at $109,000 a copy won’t be looking at the Volt. The people who will be looking at the Volt will be the hard working people of this great country who need and deserve a practical and affordable 21st century alternative to the 19th century internal combustion based vehicle.
Respectfully,
Richard B. Cort
Dear Mr. Lutz:
I heard that the Chevy Volt will have roughly 40 miles driving range depending on localized conditions or driving patterns, that’s great and large step forward. Why the hell would you design a vehicle like the Volt that when the battery power is gone a motor will kick in, great, but the motor should not be powering the wheels, but the lithium battery. That doesn’t make any sense!
Another thing that doesn’t make sense, HELLO EINSTIEN, for those of us that may live in cities, where are you going to plug your vehicle into on a city street at night? You need the engine to power and recharge the batteries, not to run like a hybrid. Geez…….Toyota and Honda are going to eat your lunch again……..why would you design the Volt that way, DUMB!
Bert Bonnabeaux
THE VOLT…. I have reserved this personalized California license plate in anticipation that the new car will actually roll out in 2010. However, given recent financial results and current leadership of the project I am concerned. Bob, you might want to re-visit your many interviews and statements over the last 5 years and then take a long look in the mirror to see if you are the future of this company and this project. As a former executive for a $15 billion company I know about grace and pride during the final years. You might want to reflect on the old Kenny Rogers song….The Gambler…” you got to know when to hold them, know when to fold ‘em, know when to walk away”… It’s time !
Take Good Care
Bill Jaeger
Just read where BOB LUTZ won’t be featured at the LA car show next week…that’s unfortunate since California just might be the future for electric and fuel efficient vehicles. My question is…. will Chevrolet roll the VOLT out with a test market similar to what the Pirius orchestrated? I would love to participate and already have a personalized California plate – THE VOLT – that I could use as the Santa Barbara & Ventura County exhibitor should I be so fortunate as to be one of the first to test drive.
Thanks !
Bill
The Volt is still the right move for GM, even with the lower gasoline prices. The Volt’s architecture as an electric vehicle with a small regenerating engine is the best system. As the electric vehicle develops, the infrastructure will follow with recharging stations placed at convenient locations. If you live in the city with no parking, then take the bus or buy a hybrid. GM makes those too!
Bob If not already done so, throw your hat in the ring, as the ideal candidate, to replace RW. Their is no question that the move needs to be made and like right now. I hope your limp board makes it a point to read commnets on this blog. I just dont see the value and the lack of fudiciary responsibility
of protecting shareholder liquidity.
The big 3 along with the uaw should be left to rot on the vine. I know it will be painful (I’m a tier 2 supplier) but it should happen.
Mr Lutz, I would like to let you know I am horrified at the amount of people who haven’t a clue what a wonderful product GM creates. I have grown up in a GM family, very proud of the product my father spent his life helping build. I have always owned a GM product. Even though we have a huge economic crisis in front of us, we (the big 3) need to find a way to change the minds of those who believe the product produced by the American Auto Companies are top of the line. I am currently driving a wonderful Buick. My husband drives a GMC pickup. I am hoping that my beloved Pontiac Motors will be around in 2010 when my lease is us so I can purchase the Torrent. I really like the Torrent’s look and my husband has rented several and he likes how it handles. If Pontiac is gone, I just don’t what I’ll get then,probably an Acadia….Chevy isn’t my cup of tea. Well, I just wanted to give you my opinion. I love the product GM sells. I have never had a bad vehicle. From my first car a 1974 Monte Carlo to our most resent. We have owned GM trucks, Chevy cars and SUVs, Saturns, Pontiacs and of course my Buick. Please work on how GM is perseved. Too bad they use the name Detroit when they are talking about the big3. I love the tricounty area and am proud to be from here but the political mess that the city has come into in the past few years doesn’t help the Big 3’s immage. Why can’t people forget about the riots…..Hasn’t happened in over 20 years, have to go to East Lansing for a good riot! Best of luck! Susan
Healthy businesses have healthy cash flows. Healthy businesses bring in more revenue than they spend on producing their goods and services. The US auto industry needs help generating a positive cash flow. That means they have to sell more vehicles at or close to their list price. The best economic stimulus package the government can give the big three are tax incentives for buyers to buy US made autos from OUR big three manufactures while they get their long term debt down and work with labor on a lot of fronts including the long term cost impact of retirement benefits which is an issue for both industry and government. A lot of factors have created the financial nightmare we have on our hands but our challenge is to find simple logical solutions to them and not waste our time or energy on searching who to blame. Everybody in some form has contributed to the problems including all levels of government and to dig our way out, we all have to pitch in.
________________________________________
There’s more than $5 trillion in retirements accounts that could singularly provide the stimulus our economy needs if the government would forgive the future tax obligation on these deferred savings plus allowed these funds to be used to pay down our long term debt. For example, my deferred retirement accounts are approximately equal to my home mortgage balance. If I used these accounts to pay off my mortgage, the financial system would benefit through improved liquidity. I would no longer have interest tax deductions to write off on my tax return which means I’d be paying more taxes. This would help the liquidity of the government. Even though I’d be paying higher taxes by no longer having interest deductions, my actual cash flow would improve because I’d no longer have monthly mortgage payments to make which are greater than the tax savings from the interest deduction on my tax return. In short, by waving taxes on retirement accounts and expanding our access to our own money, we can create a win win win situation.
To fix a financial crisis, the outflow of money has to be reduced while the inflow of money has to be increased. What I’ve suggested below are ways to accomplish both a reduced outflow at all levels and improved inflows at all levels for the purpose of stimulating the economy. 80% to 90% of the work force is in good financial shape. These people have the capital to stimulate the economy but their access to over $5 trillion is limited.
All the stimulus plans I have read call for increased spending by our government, who is broke. I’m not sure increasing our outflows of money in a financial crisis is really a stimulus we can survive. If you’re broke, how will increased spending solve the problem? Spending money that individuals, businesses and all levels of government didn’t have created the current mess. Accelerating spending by government when they’re broke is not a solution.
________________________________________
I have written down some ideas on how the public can both help with the economic recovery and in turn benefit through their participation. Tax payers have tremendous wealth in retirement accounts that isn’t liquid plus there’s a future tax obligation on this money. Providing access to retirement accounts before retirement age and waving the taxes on them is a way to empower the public’s participation in the recovery. Rather than give industry the tax payer’s future tax dollars to get the economy started, why not give back the tax dollars to those that pay them in exchange for paying down their debt and/or to make home purchases all of which pumps money directly into the US economy. Also, by pumping money into the sectors of the economy that are struggling, we can hopefully save jobs in these sectors plus create some new ones for those who have recently lost theirs. My ideas are attached. I have also pasted them below.
Ways Main Street can help the Economy
Facts
Our financial system is in financial trouble and needs to be fixed.
Our housing and home building industry is in trouble and needs to be fixed.
The US auto industry is in trouble and needs to be fixed.
We use too much fossil fuel per capita regardless of the source and we need to cut our use dramatically.
Local, State and Federal Government is spending money they don’t have.
Jobs are being lost in the financial sector, housing sector and transportation sector at an alarming rate and it could get much worst.
Main Street needs direct help.
Objective
Solve the above problems at the same time within 24 months.
Suggestions on how Main Street can help solve the above problems
1. Workers have substantial savings in retirement accounts that aren’t liquid. The Government has learned how to function without collecting taxes on these deferred contributions. Suggestion: Wave the future tax obligations on retirement accounts and allow access to these accounts before retirement age for specific uses. Allow these funds to be used to pay down and/or pay off existing home mortgages, credit card balances, car loans on domestic automobiles and college loans. This will move money from the stock market to the banking system, significantly improving the liquidity of both Main Street and Wall Street.
2. Improving the liquidity of both Main Street and Wall Street will help the housing market. Suggestion: In addition to allowing retirement accounts to be used to pay down and/or pay off mortgages, money from retirement accounts could also be used for down payments on home purchases putting more money into the financial system which hopefully will lead to an increased demand for housing which would stabilize housing prices.
3. The 3 US Auto manufactures have billions tied up in inventory. Before giving them cash, give Main Street incentives to buy their inventory. Suggestion: Give buyers tax credits for cash purchases of US made vehicles that are for vehicles made on or before a certain date so they are cars currently in inventory. Also allow car loan interest to be deducted as they had once been for US made cars plus allow cars to be partially depreciated. Also give graduated tax credits for fuel efficient cars starting at 25 mile per gallon on the highway and graduated tax debits for cars averaging less than 25 miles per gallon. Providing tax credits and debits for the consumer should encourage fuel efficient car purchases which will reduce our per capita consumption of fossil fuel. Detroit makes cars and trucks to meet the consumers’ preferences. Give consumers a reason to want fuel efficient vehicles.
4. The Government needs to force good business practices on the US auto industry before giving them money. Suggestion: The auto industry should move away from “model year” where cars are changed every 12 months and go to an “edition” where cars do not change any more frequently than every 36 months. Currently, manufactures are discounting cars 3 to 5 months a year to clear inventory for the new model year. Besides the saving from not having to discount so often, car manufactures will save by not having to retool so often. As long as Government is providing financial support to the US auto manufactures, they should also insist that production be tied to sales to avoid inventory build-up. Once there’s an appropriate (small) inventory, Government should require that before a car can be built, a car needs to be sold out of inventory.
5. In the not too distant future, we will not have any oil. The Government, the auto industry, the airline industry and the railroad industry needs to start collaborating on transportation for the future. Main Street needs leaders who are positioning us for the future and not just reacting to the latest crisis. Suggestion: Rather than invest in new infrastructure for technologies that are nearing extinction, we should be investing in the infrastructure of the future post fossil fuels. All industries involved in transportation today need to work together to provide transportation in the immediate future for people and products. How will food move from the farm to our homes? How will people move from home to work or elsewhere? Addressing our transportation needs post fossil fuel offers significant business and employment opportunities beyond today’s crisis.
6. The number of people employed by Local, State and Federal Government is too high and costs too much. With half our working force employed by some form of government, Main Street looks like government occupation. We need a revival for free enterprise. Suggestion: Freeze hiring at all levels of government until there’s a 20% reduction in head count through attrition. Move people down in government organizations to fill vacancies. Re-adjust the pay for those who do move down to their new roles. Also, provide economic incentives to create good jobs in the US for the middle and lower income in the private sector. We need a higher percentage of our workforce deriving their incomes from producing something and fewer dependants on tax revenues.
We live in a free enterprise system that requires free enterprise for Main Street to prosper. Tapping into the wealth of Main Street and modifying access, use and tax of retirement accounts is good business and it reeks of free enterprise. Fixing the businesses that need fixing is the best way to create jobs for those who are loosing jobs in those sectors today. Collaboration between government, industry and the public for our long term well being is good for all and it is what is needed. We all win together and we all fail together. These changes will have a short term impact on stock prices with retirement savings being moved out of the stock market to be used to reduce consumer debt but long term, anything that improves the bottom line which all the above does, improves the stock values and they too need fixing but that’s the end result of fixing businesses and our government.
Dear Bob
The crisis of the American auto industrials haunted around my mind for several days. Now, I have some ideas to help auto industrials to go through this difficult time.
The high benefit package of the union worker was the blame for the crisis of the auto industrial. On one hand, it is burden for the corporation. On the other hand, the reputation of the high compensation for its worker was the incentive to attract talent people working for the company. My point is not how to execute or assign the high benefit package. My point is how to squeeze out the competitors and regain the market share back to American auto industrials. Unfortunately, everything went opposite way now. The competitors try to squeeze out our industrial and occupy our market. The patriotic will not help us to compete but the better strategy will.
First, let us analysis how the foreign company steal American auto market. They use two strategies to invade American auto market as every other industrial. One is improving the auto quality. The second is lowering the cost. We can compete with them for first point but failed on second.
Here is the strategy based on above obvious reason. The strategy is very simple. For the small car models where the foreign companies dominate market, we could move out the same car model to the China to lower the cost. We even don’t have use our own money. All we needed to do is persuade Chinese government use their money to invest on our certain models that can compete with the foreign companies on small car market. After we squeeze out our foreign competitors out the market, we have the power to determine the prices. We even don’t need worry about the Chinese because they only make the car for us and we control the techs and markets. We still take big share of the profit through that kind of cooperation. In addition, we also can occupy the Chinese auto market through our cooperation.
For other car models which American auto markers dominate the market, we still can keep in the American. Plus, we will invest on new models which can beat our competitor in the future. We can obtain the invention and patent profits by investing the future car models and keep our auto industrial survived in American soil.
The best management strategy is always grabbing your competitor’s throat. Never let your competitor grabs yours.
Richard
GM can still sell the big cars it makes with one major change. GM needs to use Stan Meyers 40 patents for conversion of conventional Gas engines to run on water as a fuel. Thus, GM can continue to sell their large complex cars that people will want all over the world. GM has image of being the corrupt employee of the Oil Giants by selling gas hogs the fill the world with CO2, CO, waste oil, and is viewed as a salesman of globalization at the expense of the American Nation. America may someday be getting back a thank-you-card for Globalization from foreign nations in the form of bombs and slavery status after loosing the U.S. Industrial base with the help of GM’s antiquated ways.
Why the new Chevy Camaro will also fail! The American automakers still don’t get it. Two years ago Ford abandoned the Taurus brand for the older Five Hundred moniker. Then when they realized that the brand name they spent billions of dollars cultivating for over 20 years should have been continued it was too late, they lost customers because they through away Brand Loyalty. GM/Buick did the same thing when they ditched the Lasabre brand. Then Mr Lutz was hot for bringing back the GTO moniker, was it a good car? A fast performance car? Yes to both, but why did it bomb? The same reason the Camaro is going to bomb. GM and Mr. Lutz just don’t get it. Ford did with the Mustang, Chrysler did with the Charger and Challenger, but GM and Mr. Lutz don’t. If your are going to put an American muscle car moniker on your cars, make sure they are built in AMERICA, not Australia. No American muscle car buyer wants their American Muscle car built in any other country but AMERICA.
Why doesn’t GM pull the plug and let it go down the drain. I spent 30 years at GM. I liked my job and worked as hard and as smart as I could as I watched management consolidate and reorganize a great company out of business. Why wasn’t there full page adds telling the GM customer that Nader was wrong and just looking for deep pockets? Why did accounting trump styling and engineering. I my opinion Roger initiated the demise of the corporation. There was EDS (End of Dependable Service), Hughs, and the crowning blow Saturn plus BOC (Big Overpriced Cars) and CPC Cheap Plastic Cars). Roger is gone (Dead) and so is EDS, Hughs, BOC, CPC and very soon Saturn. Last but not least the factory of the future (Lights Out Factory) and the Jobs Bank they are gone too. It is dedicated people who design, engineer and assemble the automobile that will insure its success not the manager, accountant, and bag man. So long GM I hope there is a future in your Toyota.
Mr. Lutz:
I have no reservations about your passion for the automobile. Your record speaks for itself based on my understood involvement with projects like the Cunningham C7, Cadillac Sixteen Concept, et al.
However, it is overshadowed by your practical, and ineffective application and roll-out of products like the Pontiac Aztek, the entire Buick line, and ineffective “import” of outstanding Holden designs, and over reliance of European designs to stamp out fifteen versions of the same vehicle (ala Malibu, Saturn L series, Saab, etc).
Now, GM finds itself with known quality trucks, but mainstream vehicles with a perception that they are not worth the asking price. Regardless of real quality, the perception of the marketplace has ruled the roost, and it is unfortunate. The revival of Cadillac has not provided the boost to the rest of GM’s line, and it was money invested disproportionately.
With $2000-5000 off the top designed to pay for obligations that GM has boxed itself into, that have nothing to do with actually making cars (or pay the electricity, parts, current employees), GM is at a price advantage. The Chevy Malibu is a competent competitor to the Toyota Camry, but not at the current price point.
GM cannot survive its current outlays.
Here are fifteen steps which I believe will give GM real viability in the future. It involves tough decisions, but the pain is mandatory. Misery is optional:
1. Declare and enter bankruptcy protection.
2. Dissolve the labor agreement.
3. Dissolve the jobs-bank.
4. Decide if it will remain with a unionized manufacturing labor force (whole other process).
4a. Renegotiate new labor agreement from a clean slate.
4b. or Hire on manufacturing workers on a case-by-case basis, following Honda or Toyota’s model.
5. Sell Saab.
6. Sell Daewoo.
7. Sell the rights to Oldsmobile.
8. Spin off Pontiac, and give Holden control of that unit for US market presence.
9. Spin off Saturn, and give either Opel or Vauxhall control of that unit for US market presence.
10. Shut down the Hummer brand.
11. Spin off AM General for military and commercial apps for the HMMWV.
12. Sell Buick.
13. Restructure debt, offer long term stock to settle bonds if needed.
14. Stop building 18 versions of the same vehicle and claim they’re different.
15. …and finally Mr. Lutz, it is time to retire. New blood must enter the rebuilt company and despite your ability to multitask the various brands on a global scale, you have diminished each brand and therefore, perception of product value.
…and 16. Pay back that government handout immediately. Get out from under DC’s foot!!
These initiatives can be started in mere weeks. GM retains a global presence, but decentralized, allowing strong brands to flourish.
Max,
It might help you to do a little research before you criticize Mr. Lutz for his contributions to GM. He didn’t join GM until 2002, whereas the Aztek went into production starting in model year 2001. Most people in the car business knows that the product life cycle from design to production takes several years. Therefore, any effects that Bob had on GM wouldn’t really be seen until the mid-point of this decade. In fact, he has worked to get the company away from “badge engineering” and move toward global platforms in order to reduce the cost of engineering a vehicle.
Everyone has their opinions about the quality of GM’s vehicles, and I think the new ones that have rolled out since 2007 have been great. Perception will eventually catch up to reality, and from historical purposes, it usually takes at least 1 to 2 generations of vehicles for this to happen. For example, many people rely on consumer reports to tell them about the reliability of a vehicle. However, the data the CR is using is still from 3-4 years ago, and since GM’s quality has improved significantly since then, it is just a matter of time before it shows up in those forums.
With regards to your steps that you lay out, I agree on some of them, but think you are way off-base on many of them, or are not up-to-date on current events. For example:
#3. The jobs bank has been ended. I know the official term says suspended, but in reality, it isn’t coming back, and the union knows it.
#4. As long as production happens in states without right to work laws, the workers can choose to organize. GM isn’t going to pick up and move all of their production to those states because of the cost to do so, so this is not totally up to the company. If labor contracts are voided under Chapter 11, the workers will have the choice to renegotiate the contract to be much more favorable to the company, not be part of the UAW, or not have a job. You sort of suggest this in your 4a and 4b.
#5. GM has announced they are spinning off / selling Saab by the end of 2009. Thinking this can be done faster is naive.
#6. Why would GM want to sell Daewoo? They only own 51%, and the company makes nearly every Chevrolet that is sold outside of North America. If GM were to sell their stake in Daewoo, they wouldn’t have the capacity to sell vehicles around the world.
#13. The company has until March 31 to get their debt in line, and is working toward it as described in their viability plan. We’ll see if they can do it.
#14. I refer back to my earlier comments about the global platforms. This is not the same as badge engineering as has been done in the past. Is there still some done? Yes (e.g. Aveo and G3, Cobalt and G5), but the company is getting much better about this.
I won’t go into the others that deal with specific brands, but I’m not sure you have a grasp on the workings of the company, and how complex it is to make changes. It is likely that GM will get down to 4 real brands in the US in the near future (Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick and GMC, with Pontiac being a small brand with just a couple models), and I think there might have to be even more consolidation in the future. However, this is not going to happen overnight, whether in bankruptcy protection or not.
Good Afternoon Jeff:
I encourage you to read my postings clearly. I stated that these initiatives can be “started” very quickly. The bottom line is that GM is cash starved. Outlays far outweigh incoming, and with billions in overhead, the company must make earth-shattering, ground-breaking, write-a-new-book, series of decisions.
Mr. Lutz did not come to GM as the vice-chair. He started in North American Development, stating that a never realized “super-car” would save GM.
His resume at Chrysler saw non-critical platforms like the Plymouth Prowler, Dodge Viper, and LH platforms.
Again though, his involvement in these, specifically show me that he is indeed passionate about the automobile, and I bet he enjoys mashing that right-pedal.
However, he has not revived the culture at GM.
To discuss some of your items point -by-point:::::
#3 — Good. Unfortunately, it may prove too little, too late.
#4 — Exactly, however, this question needs to be openly discussed in the executive suites at GM (and Ford and Chrysler for that matter). Once answered, the traditional play-book needs to be thrown out. UAW must refocus out of the politics, and back to practical protections, not perks.
#5 — Only as Saab files for bankruptcy itself. That once “quirky”, proud brand is now a mish-mash of GM leftovers, and their sales have suffered horribly. GM destroyed that company.
#6 — Suzuki currently builds the Chevy Tracker on the Vitara vein in Japan. Suzuki can manufacture under license for the far-east. Daewoo isn’t fully integrated into the “global” strategy yet, GM can utilize Vauxhall and Opel to handle Europe, Middle-east and African markets. Daewoo, still viable, and can provide a much needed infusion of cash.
#13 — Congressional oversight is not in synch with efficiency or knowledge of any industry.
#14 — The rebranding with GM continues to be out of control:
Example A: Trailblazer, Rainier (gone), Envoy, Ascender, Bravada (gone), 9-7x, XL7.
Example B: Cobalt, G5, Astra, Ion, HHR
Example C: G6, 9-3, Aura, Malibu
Example D: Traverse, Outlook, Enclave, Acadia
The only line that is exclusive is Cadillac, and that is not built to sustain GM as a whole.
This is not representative of American innovation.
I want GM to succeed. You can espouse about the complexities all you want, but this matter is not complex: $75/hr vs. $35/hr. If GM can’t compete at this level, the complexities don’t matter. This didn’t happen overnight, but GM must get out of the woods five times faster than it found itself there.
As to quality. I agree with your assessment, that it takes time to catch up. However, that does not make up for the “value” segment. A nearly “max-ed” out Malibu MSRP for $31K. A Camry XLE the same. When you consider the overhead that GM has to pay for that doesn’t even cover “real” overhead, that Malibu should be costing $26K loaded to the hilt. That enhances real “value” and perception of “bang for the buck”. Chevy had this problem with the Camaro versus the Mustang, GM had a spec-superior product, but they weren’t as well built.
Now, while I believe the labor problems are a major factor, there is another side to this which can no longer be ignored by GM’s shareholders: executive pay. I do not begrudge success, performance based pay needs to have the lumps that go with it.
This may be GM’s last chance to get it right.
GM, now that you’ve taken the government money, now the government is going to try and tell you how to make cars.
CEO Rick Wagoner to quit at request of the White House??!!
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gm_wagoner
Has the world gone mad? GM, you brought this on your self, along with UAW. How you managed to make the numbers work as long as you did is beyond me, but if you don’t find a way to pay back that “loan” to the feds, the game will be up.
I am very sorry too.
LEASE FOR LIFE … GM should do for cars what I do for equipment … my new equipment is covered by a bumper to bumper warranty for 12 months, I structure a 72 month lease for my customers, including maintenance (which doesn’t cost me anything, PM’s only) and give them a new unit every 12 months which provides the best used equipment available but locks my customer in for 6 years. GM should do a 10 year term and I get a new car every year for the same price…. very profitable both on the front end and back, my new numbers are high and my used sales are fantastic. Have Mr. Lutz call me and I will help him refine this plan ….. Bob Bowers 443-362-2064
Mr. Lutz ,
Rebuilding GM is very easy . Build good looking , quality car’s that people want.
Do you remember the 1950’s and 60’s ? How about the 1969 potiac GTO or the
1968 Corvette. A great retro C3 would be nice . Lets forget OnStar and fancy radio’s
and heated seat’s. Oh YES lets get rid of those stupid air bags. Give us back a
real steering wheel and without all those stupid gauges and controls. Put in better
seats , seat brackets and seatbelts .
Shelby has a v6 that gets more power and better gas milage than a v8. Can he do
something you can’t ? I can build a carburator in my own basement ,over a
long weekend , that get’s 50 miles per gallon . So I know you can.
Let’s get together and make GM what it used to be . King of the hill — and lets
send those foreign manufacturers packing for home.
Steven j. Brooks
I haven’t owned a GM product since my 1974 Pontiac Ventura’s 350c.i. engine needed a valve job at 13,000 miles,too bad the warranty ran out at 12,000 miles. Since then I have driven several GM trucks for extended periods of time the last being a 1 ton Chevy with a 350 c.i. engine that was still going strong at 150,000 miles.My personal car is a 2005 Mazda 3,your cars just seem too big on the outside by about 1/8 and no bigger on the inside.The dealer where I bought it is also a GM dealer and everytime I go in for service,the waiting room is full of GM owners in for recalls.Even though the recalls don’t cost them a nickle,their time is just as valuable to them as your is to you.
I recently saw the article in the Fort Wayne Journal Gazette dated 7-21-08 and was moved by your pride and commitment to making GM the Auto leader in todays time. I to have felt your pride and have only ever purchased new GM vehicles, however I have recently experienced a warranty issue on a 2008 Saturn Sky Redline. I am appauled by the treatment given to us by GM reps at your 800 customer service number. I am also extremely dissapointed in the customer service we have received from our local Saturn Dealership. I would have never guessed that my pride in the US auto industry could be taken from me in a few short minutes on the phone. I believe in your statement “Every launch of every name plate has to be a home run”. I only wish your 800 customer service employees and the Dealership in Fort Wayne Indiana shared the same commitment and pride that it appears you have.
Dear Bob,
I am a former U.S. Marine stationed at AirFMFPac, MCAS, El Toro, CA and a licensed Instrument rated pilot, so I feel a kindred relationship with you. The last three new GM products that I purchased has destroyed my faith in GM. The vehicles were: (1) 1978 Buick Sport Regal V6 with turbo charger (failed just out of warranty), (2) 1981 Oldsmobile Delta 88 Royal Brougham (numerous electrical problems plus 2 failed transmissions, one in, one out of warranty), (3) 1988 Chevrolet Silverado Pickup (numerous failures, transmission, A/C, leaking windows, failed gear indicator, headliner fell down) I was further disenchanted after GM first claimed that if they could receive the TARP money, they could avoid bankruptcy, then after receiving $23 Billion of U.S. taxpayer money, GM filed bankruptcy and stiffed the legal bond holders and jumped the UAW to the head of the debtors line and gave them ownership in GM. I can no longer have faith in the integrity of GM due to these events. I presently drive a 2007 Honda Ridgeline RTL and a 50 year Anniversary 2004 Porsche Boxster S. I do not know if you can do anything to recover GM to what it once was, but I have absolutely no faith in Mr. Whitacre, who in my opinion is nothing but a historically obscenely over compensated prima dona.
Dear Bob,
I also wish to add to my previous post that I think that this latest offer of trying one of GM’s products “risk free” for 60 days is an insult to the intelligence of any new car purchaser. This is not “risk free” for the purchaser because they stand to lose their trade in, their license, registration and sales tax, not to mention prepayments on insurance and then what about unwinding the loan if they finance? Additionally, the GM sales person is not going to be happy about losing their commission if one of these vehicles are returned, which seems to me a very expensive and red tape laden gamble for any consumer. Finally, I do not believe that your negative advertising using former Oakland Raiders great line backer Howie Long is showing any class by knocking Ford, Honda and the rest of your competition. This only turns potential buyers off and insults their intelligence.
As long as Obama has his finger prints on GM along with Chrysler corp. I and my family will not buy a gm car. i think the FORD motor company is the best investment. they have a proven vehicle. and did not take the tax payers money.
Matt
In my Naval Aviation Career (55 till 59) I drove a K3 Chrysler Allard from Pensacola, Fl to Kingsville,Tx and finally to Brunswick Me. It was a hand built production Sports Car whose engineers never heard of the weakest link in the chain but thats another story. A small flaw that causes an inconvience is not remembered by the cost of the repair as with Julius Caesar; “The evil that men do lives long after them, the good is oft intered with their bones”, so it is with the vehicles we build. Down with the bean-counters that save a penney on a bearing and give the vehicle a bad rep for mechanical failures. I always fumed when the non-USA car drivers bragged about the quality and longevity of their vehicles and gas economy. Yes the reliability was good but it cost X% more to buy and repair it while the body turned to rust and it collapsed onto your lap in a crash. Remember that Women and Kids carry a big stick in what cars are bought and they are not swayed by technical facts but are by pretty and kool to drive reps. Keep up the good work at inproving the “Built in USA” rep as it was in the early 20th century.
Tom Dolasky