Context is Everything

Bob: Pontiac's muscular design? Street credibilty? The crticism is well deserved and the Holdenesque GTO is the posterchild. Build something people want through the eyes of a performance enthusiast, not what looks good on paper to a beacounter.

Bob, I was thinking the other day that you guys were handling the press much better than your predecessors . . . until I read your above missive.

I've got the March 28 Automotive News sitting right in front of me. Are you suggesting that its coverage manipulated facts for shock value? I hope not, because it is real obvious that they did their job in a fair and thorough manner.

I suppose it is easy to beat up on the press, particularly when you are being pounded by your dealers. However, this strikes me as a risky gambit on your part.

I'm hard pressed to think of an auto executive who has been treated better by journalists than yourself. Why jeopordize that relationship by projecting blame where it doesn't belong?

Frankly, I thought it was refreshing to read that GM would consider phasing out more brands if they didn't recover. Sure that's sad, but it is also good business sense.

Let's get real: The reason why GM tanked in the early 1990s was that management didn't have the backbone to make the tough calls.

I hope that you guys are different. Do what you need to do and don't get spooked by the press (or your dealers). If your plans are sound they'll come around.

Mr. Lutz,

Thank you for the clarification. As a sales consultant for a PGB dealer we took the information as a misunderstanding but it is nice to hear it straight from the source. I do however look forward to some more positive blogs in regards to new products, technology, etc. From someone doing his part to increase GM's current market share, I appreciate the work that yourself & your team at GM are doing. The new Buicks alone have our dealership over 50% of our total Buick sales projection for the year. I have found that as long as we don't let ourselves be effected by the negative press that you are referring to, we are going to continue to have great response to the new Pontiacs & Buicks. I look forward to selling new Pontiacs, GMCs, & Buicks for quite some time.

A Firebird like car would sure ignite some excitment into the division, but sadly it's gone and it is a gap that desperately needs to be filled.

Your plan to "reignite Pontiac's muscular design and street credibility" is exactly what I wanted to hear. Offer an alternative to a Mustang and my money is yours.

No....the GTO is not an alternative. Not with that body.

Mr Lutz,
The Media absolutely pounced on your comments in a some-what unfair manner. They have been up and down the backs of the domestic auto-makers for a long time. While GM isn't in the best of positions right now, it is not nearly as bad off as it was in the early 90s, nor as bad as Ford was a few years back.

I think the enthusiasts and car magazine types have been a little frustrated because today's GM products, while much better in terms of quality and reliability, just seems like another generic car or truck with a 4-speed auto. But to be fair, I know the comments you have made about changing GM's corporate culture and am very excited to see the fruits of more invigorated designs in the coming years. It will only take a few home-runs to make GM look like a world class player again.

Bob,

Your position is understandable - my friends have had similar issues with my college's newspaper. Editors have a way of twisting your words to create interesting stories.

This blog is great for consumers - I just stubbled upon it today. Maybe GM should advertise it a little better - I wouldn't have found it had I not been fiddling around on the gm card website.

Bob,
I agree that the media has a huge tendency to blow things way out of proportion. I just really have one things to say about new products, especially the more exciting, performance orientated vehicles. Please, GM MUST do something about outrageous dealer markup. Thats one thing that hurt the '04 GTO sales soo much. Dealers were marking up the price sometimes in excess of $5000! I fear the same thing will happen with the Solstice, and any other new "excitement" cars that could really kill sales. I dont know what can be done but maybe enforce the dealers to have a maximum markup of $1000 for example. preferably there wouldn't be any markup at all.

LaNeve also cited our intentions to "reignite Pontiac's muscular design and street credibility"

It's quite hard to have street cred when you introduce things like the G6 on OPRAH. That should have been a Saturn car - it could have replaced that piece of junk L300. Besides, instead of introducing new sedans to Pontiac, you should fix the ones you already have. The Grand Am and Grand Prix seriously need some updates in the styling department.

And if you want street cred you need to get rid of the Sunfire, Aztek, Montana, and moving the G6 to Saturn wouldn't be a bad idea. Pontiac can't have street cred with a MINIVAN in its lineup.

The Bonneville should only be offered in the GXP model, which would help to increase "muscular design" across the brand. Oh, and bring back the Firebird because nobody wants an "American icon" GTO that's made in Australia. That REALLY hurts Pontiac's street cred when you outsource the GTO to Australia...

I fail to see how this is any different that Lutz's other rhetoric on blaming the media. GM's mainstream products are constantly behind almost every other competitor, and his lambasting of the media is only a smokescreen to make dealers and some ill-informed consumers feel better. Comparing a Malibu to an Accord makes it clear that the Malibu is better in price only because of massive rebates. The Colbalt? decent try but its a MKIV Jetta a generation too late.

GM is not giving people "excitement" with their driving experience anymore, unless you can spend some major money.

GM needs to be America's Car Company again. But we can't until the person that works at Wal-Mart can afford to buy a car that he/she is excited about.

And yes, I said "we". I am a GM employee and proud of my company. I believe IF GM will listen to the customers - the people who work for you - GM can survive and grow. We are your greatest resource.

Bob,
There has been so mich negativity in the past few weeks brewing around GM with every media outlet predicting which division has to get the axe before Toyota comes waltzing in with a big fat check to take over all of it. One item that has caused this attention has certainly been GM's temporary financial situation. I am glad to see you and the company stand against these onslaughts.

You cited Mark LaNeve's memo to dealers and I include part of it here. [LaNeve also cited our intentions to "reignite Pontiac's muscular design and street credibility" and build Buick as a brand with vehicles that are the "quietest and highest-quality in their segment."]

Now that's what I'm talkin' about. Pontiac IS muscle, excitement, action. With apologies to DC it's sort of like the difference between Superman and Batman. Chevy is Superman with all kinds of built in powers (C6, SS) and only Kryptonite can stop him. Pontiac is like Batman (the original, not the dark side) in that he stops just as many criminals but does it with cunning and thought, and really really cool wheels, not to mention a utility belt. It's time for Pontiac to pull a few more items from the utility belt, do a bat-turn, turn on the afterburners and go right after those bad boys from BMW, Jaguar, Audi, even Ford. I wouldn't care at this point what you call it but GM needs a Mustang roper and Pontiac is just the brand to do it.

Bob,

Accountability is valuable. GM needs some people to run on the ragged edge of opinion; when you shoot from the hip, sometimes you clip your foot. Onward, soldier!

This is good news to hear Mr. Lutz! Thank you for taking the time to clarify this for us. I have been enjoying this blog and learning more about GM and its direction.

I think it's great that your coming out with this clarification. And I think it's wonderful that GM is going to invest more heavily in its brands.

But then how about returning Saab to its quirky, innovative, and unique roots, instead of turning them into more expensive Subarus and Trailblazers?

An AWD 9-3 Sports Sedan would make Audi, Volvo, BMW, etc. tremble in their boots. Right now they're probably just kind of laughing at what used to be one of their toughest competitors.

Bob,

Then why even make the comment? I see nothing wrong with it, myself. If a brand does not sell, even after an infusion of money, you may have to look at its viability. Stick to your guns and don't hide. You may have no plans to do drop a brand, but it is an option. Demand returns out of your invesments, or drop them. And please, for the sake of the children, differentiate them!! The latest example of your "do-not-call-them-old-out-of-date-minivans" is the prime example.

I don't see how taking another one of your brands (Saturn) upscale, helps things. Especially when Buick (early '90s style), half of chevy (late '90s style) and Pontiac (any style???) are already located there and not well differentiated in looks or performance. Though, if you goal is to bring over re-badged Opels, I guess it wouldn't fly to well with loyalists in the Pontiac or Buick camps in being that they are not american designed or made. So maybe they do belong with Saturn, and at least they will be different. I just wish that their true DNA wouldn't be hidden.

It's frustrating hearing the uninformed walk around talking like Saturn is producing these cool new vehicles when all they are basically doing is changing the drivers side and slapping a Saturn Badge on them. We've all seen what Saturn is capable of producing on its own design wise.

I am admittingly a raised Ford man. But with the current state of both companies it's not that much fun of a rivalry anymore. I just thank higher powers that be that we still have our pony car.....it saves me from jumping over the old number three, who at least seems to enjoy taking risks.

Thank you for this clarification! And, as a highly satisfied owner of a 2004 GTO, please allow me to thank you for that as well. The combination of understated grace, rock-solid build quality and viseral power is what prompted me to buy one nearly "on the spot" one year ago today! I am absolutely thrilled with the car and don't intend to replace it for years to come - unless '07 or '08 hold a wonderful GTO surprise for me...

Thanks again!

Bob,

Don't blame years of little investment for Pontiac and Buick for the lackluster sales of the G6 and Lacrosse. You should know better. Where is the street credibility? And I am not talking about a renamed Monaro. What happened to the G6? How many days are they sitting at the dealers? 144.

These two cars are good but not class leading. Take responsibility, you make millions of dollars a year doing your job at least you should do it well.

This criticism is coming from someone who's family has over 13 GM vehicles sitting in our driveways but give us something great or we will have to look elsewhere.

I have to agree with what GM has done for Cadillac and with time will hopefully do for Buick and Pontiac. I trade every 2 years and have lately had a 2003 Volvo S60 AWD and a 2001 Lexus...but last week after much comparing drove off in a new SRX...great job GM on this vehicle...smoother, quieter and a better deal than X5, XC90, etc....If this is what's coming for the rest of GM they should have no problems.

I'll confess I've never been a real GM fan. But I'm about to be in the market for a second car. (I'm married, with three children. First car is a Honda minivan.) What does GM offer that's really competitive in the bread-and-butter market? I certainly don't want the plasticky interiors that currently grace Pontiac products, not to mention the crazy fascia that's on the entire Pontiac line. Chevy designs are all just homely. (And something needs to be done to make the Chevy bowtie a little less 'retro'. Don't get rid of it, but stop the plastic, bronze look too. It just looks cheap.)

My previous 2001 Accord (4-cyl) was easily outgunned on the horsepower front by several GM models, but the Accord had some class to it. It felt like a modern car. I didn't have to hang my head that I "settled" for a Grand Am.

I know the Americans are up to this task, but GM needs to get back in this game. A good performing engine mated to a car with some 'taste' to it will sell.

By the way, it also helps if the car I buy isn't the foundation of rental fleets across America. Nothing kills resale value like having a glut of low-end, abused models on the market.

Mr. Lutz:

It's not very helpful to attribute even a sliver of blame on the 'shock-driven' media. I assume that your blog was a result of negative feedback from your dealer network.

Just who do you think your real customers are? Are they the dealers who make gobs of money from your products? Or are they the average-Joe who works his tail off to make that extra $100/month payment tacked on by the dealer?

Come on. Stop pandering to the old-boy network and remember who your real customer is. Cut the losing brands. Close the extra dealers. Consolidate the product line.

Focus on what's best for the average American consumer (not the dealer network!), and maybe you'll actually save the company.

Mr. Lutz:

Your actions will speak louder than your words (whether mis-quoted or not). While the Buick LaCroose and Buick Lucerne seem to be improvements over previous models, we loyal Buick fans are waiting and hoping for something more. You're going in the right direction with the quality and refinement in Buick, but shed its conservative image once and for all by dazzling our eyes with distinctive, bold styling and smooth power that all new Buicks should have. (For the Lucerne to come with a paltry 190-hp engine is absurd.) I'm anxiously anticipating the 2007 Buick Rendezvous, but how about a smaller crossover for Buick? A smaller wagon? (Don't only make 4-door sedans!) I'll put my money where my mouth is and buy a new Buick in a couple years, when the dust settles - but the first move is yours. Please don't disappoint us!

Mr. Lutz,

Regardless of how the media reports the problems with GM, it doesn't take an investigative reporter to understand why your products have failed to keep the company profitable; has anyone at GM been listening to customers or reading reviews over the past several years? With the notable exception of Cadillac and the new Corvette, the products don't measure up or exceed the competition in any way - definitely not styling, not power, not price or reliablity.

I keep waiting for GM to get it right in every aspect (Design, reliability, power, dealer and corporate service committment) so I would actually buy one of your vehicles again, despite years of foreign models.

I'm a shareholder who's not happy about the performance of the company, and a consumer with money to spend on a car that moves me. So what's on my list? How about the Solstice - I've had a deposit down for 2 months, only to hear that now I've got to compete for the first 1000 with people who will have never heard of the car before 4/14. The kicker - it may not even be released until Fall! I think I'll buy Miata #3 instead. Thanks Bob. This is one of countless situations when I wonder, as an investor and consumer, what the h**l are you thinking?!

Because I'm an optimist (I still have that stock) I'll continue to hope that you get the message intended, and stop bellyaching about the way you received it. Do something about it, listen to your (potential) customers, give us good products quickly and with a smile.

Bob,

Honestly, how can you tell us that the G6, Lacrosse, and Cobalt are strong new products when the inventory levels say otherwise? When you build cars that exceed expectations and set new class standards, then strong sales will follow. These new offerings are not good enough to draw people away from the much stronger competition. It's all about product.

Bob, it's great to hear that Pontiac and Buick will not leave. The thought of them leaving almost gave me a heart attack!

But now I'm wondering, how can Pontiac have "street credibility" with Front Wheel Drive? With Zeta out of the picture, I just can't see this happening...

And get rid of Buick's and Pontiac's minivans. It's like giving Lexus and BMW a minivan...

Bob,

Pontiac needs a lot of work to become the excitement devision again. Just look at the lineup - a patchwork of outdated models that are mostly reskinned Chevys. ALL of Pontiac's vehicles should carry authority with them. It does not need a minivan, the Sunfire is so outclassed it's rediculous, and the Bonneville has serious interior issues and a terrible reliability record. Trim the fat off of the brand and it will regain street cred. The G6 GTP, Grand Prix GXP, a reengineered Bonneville GXP, Vibe GT, GTO, and Solstice are all good starts, but there needs to be more RWD for Pontiac to be seen as a truely competitive sporty brand. It would also help if manual transmissions were more readily available or at least if the automatics had more than 4 forward speeds.

Please, Mr. Lutz, most people fully understand how badly things are going at GM. You are not fooling anyone. Harley Davidson is worth more than GM. The Lacrosse, G6, Cobalt and the new "cross-over" vans are terrible. Stop the "spin" bring out something people want, and no the Firebird ot Camaro won't save the company like many posters suggest. They failed once, they'll fail again.

It was nice to hear that Pontiac and Buick are saved (for now) but I never really understood the need for Saturn. It started out as a different car company but now it is just rebadging other GM models. If Saturn was gone would anybody really miss it? I have yet to see a Saturn product that I would buy. Another thing that I don't understand is why do we have to have 3-4 brands of the some product. Do we really need Chevrolet/Buick/Pontiac/Saturn Uplanders? Isn't two of any platform enough? And if GM marketing thinks they are convincing the public that these old minivans with new sheetmetal are suddenly cross utility vehicles, the public is alot smarter than that. And I think that GM could have sold the Holden here if they could have called it anything but a GTO. Don't pawn it off as something that it is not. Adding the extra horsepower won't help sales. The public is alot smarter than that. The poor SSR that is overpriced (unless it is bought at $30,000) finally gets the horsepower that that overwight truck needs. If I was spending $42,000 on a toy I could buy a real 1950 Chevy street rod with air and 500 hp. One of the few cars that GM has done right is the Corvette. Best performance for the dollar, nice looks and respect. maybe that should be three criteria for the most other GM cars. Thank you for offering an old die hard car guy a place to vent.

Dear Mr. Lutz:

Thanks for the blog forum. Its great to be able to communicate our ideas and frustrations. I am a a retail gm sales person. I think your top mgmt. people need to come back into the retail sales environment and attempt to retail your products. I think it would be interesting to see how many of them would last 6 months. Your over reliance on rebates and cheap deal of the month are part of whats killing your company. You build zero brand loyalty by your knee jerk incentives. I think you guys have been in the ivory tower too long. Make it a requirment to have all your top exec's. spend one year in a dealership. I think it would do wonders for their perspective. You guys have created the mess your in. You need to come out and see whats its really like in a retail dealership.

The fix is in valueing your PEOPLE, having PASSION for what you do, and great PRODUCT!! The choice is yours!
GM can do better much better. I will look forward to all the great product that is around the corner.

Mr. Lutz,

Glad to hear you fight back!! The media sure can be brutal.

Did you see Mark Phelan's column in the Detroit Free Press about the Toyota Avalon ??

He cut it down to size, telling about trim problems, fit and finish issues and poor quality materials. How come everyone else is drooling over it?? Perceived quality, that's why.

It will be tough for GM to overcome the perceived quality image, but a flawless launch of the Solstice will be a big help. I sure hope you can pull it off. Keep up the good work!

CC

Bob,

I agree with what you are trying to get across here when it comes to the media, but please don't spin for us.

How can you: "Reignite Pontiac's muscular design and street credibility" while you are pointing to and heaping praise on the Torrent which is a Chevrolet Equinox, powered by a made-in-China minivan engine from 10 years ago, with only a Pontiac grille and a "sport tuned suspension" to set it apart from the Chevy?

Mr. Lutz:

I can't say enough good things about this blog that you started, although I wish I could say the same about GM products.

Here's a suggestion: Start a Project Apollo at GM, as ambitious as putting a man on the moon. The goal of Project Apollo would be to develop best in class vehicles that are affordable and that customers really want to buy!

With your vast worldwide resource and talent pool, I know GM is capable of reaching this goal. Just make your troops clearly accountable for the results and go for it!

I have to take issues with "Rob" and his comments. Sometimes I get the feeling that the people who blast some of these new GM products have never sat in or driven them. The Cobalt IS a worthy effort...check the automotive magazines for their seal of approval (if this is your thing, personally I decide for myself what is good and what isn't...)

Second, no a new Camaro will not "save" GM, but a properly done Camaro can easily sell 100,000 units a year and give a countless number of GM performance enthusiasts a reason to continue buying GM vehicles. If you haven't noticed, the Mustang is on its way to selling 200k+ units this year...and if you don't think Mustang buyers don't also look at F150's or Explorers and Five Hundreds for the family, you're crazy.

Maybe GM SHOULD shed a brand. Sadly, I don't think too many people would miss Pontiac or Buick.

I also agree that Pontiac (and maybe even Buick) probably don't both need vans. If you're consolidating Pontiac and Buick, then you're just creating redundancy you claim you're trying to eliminate.

I'm 30 years old and live in South Florida, where almost no one my age I know drives an American car. Most people my age wouldn't even think of stepping foot in a Big 3 showroom, much less actually buying a car there.

As I was growing up, my father drove Pontiacs and Cadillacs. I consider myself way more open to buying an American car than most of my friends, but the couple of times I actually tried buying one ('97 GP GTP, '04 GTO) the dealers weren't willing to work with me, and I sure wasn't going to pay sticker for ANY car, so now, I'm happy with my Acura.

A new Camaro is not going to save GM, but it couldn't hurt. The last one was incredibly long in the tooth, so sales went down. When sales went down, GM said, "I guess no one wants coupes," so they killed it. Maybe what people don't want is an OLD couple. They sure as heck don't want an ugly one -- the Monte Carlo. After getting into a crash a couple years ago, Enterprise rented me a Monte. I returned it the next day and rented a Mitsubishi Eclipse instead. I just couldn't stand looking at the hideous Monte Carlo (not that the Eclipse is all-that-pretty, either).

If you do create a new Camaro, DO NOT do the retro thing. It's a formula for only short-term success (Thunderbird, New Beetle, PT Cruiser). People get excited, pent up demand drives sales for 15 months, then everyone who wanted one has bought one, and sales tank. Then, what do you do to redesign it? You can't go retro again, so you're stuck. I'm willing to bet the Mustang will also nosedive once all these old men who are too old to be driving Mustangs buy them in order to pretend they're young, thin, full of hair, and cool again.

The new GTO is a conservative design, but at least it's clean and classy -- except for the spolier -- yuck! Still, it's a car someone over 25 can be seen in without looking like a teen wannabe or a disillusioned baby boomer.

Mr. Lutz,

Thanks for correcting the misperception right away. Thats the way to do it.

I hope GM is just as resilient inside and that there will be a quick remedy to product issues on the new cars like the LaCrosse needs a bigger trunk to match the competition, and a real wood dash option, and not plastic wood. I'd rather see a plain dash than plastic wood, yes I know Toyota has plastic wood. But that is because they are copying not leading.

Also, I hope you are not giving up on the customers and will give GTO a new body style more like the concept drawings which remind us of the real GTO.

The G6 is great, but where is the 4 cyclinder at a lower price?

Lets get rid of the ugly Toyota jelly bean look. Give the Grand Prix a look of its own, it looks too much like the former Grand AM.

Love the Northstar engine for the GXP, but the Bonneville is due for a new look its body style has been around. People don't know it has a new engine.

Cadillac is succeeding because it is differentiated, it has its own design, it has superior technology, and high energy appeal confident ads.

Remember don't run from your heritage, embrace it.

GM ads should embrace its heritage like they did before with slogans like, "This is who we are and what we are at General Motors." Remember the "GM Mark of Excellence." There the quality campaign winner in a nutshell. Excellence!

If you want to sell more cars, keep the beautiful designs coming, GM's creativity and Technology are unmatched, that has always been GM's marque. Don't give up on the customers, persistence will show the undecided customers the media bias is wrong and may even persuade the media to change. If your competition has to get its customers from media bias for its free advertising, it should tell you that they subconsciously fear a competitive responsive GM. They know GM is superior, thats why they taunt you, and why they are jealous. And they know GM enthusiasts know it. Its the undecided customers they are confusing.

We'll help you unconfuse the confused media all we can. Behind you all the way!!!

Bob,

Have you ever considered dialing back media dollars spent with a specific entity that initially misquoted you or took your words out of context and published them? The other media would undoubtedly rally behind the initial news source but I would stick to my guns that unprofessional reporting that materially affects your business should not be rewarded.

That said I think that in your heart you are coming to the realization that there are in fact too many GM divisions and some need to go. Consider that Toyota has done the bulk of their damage to GM with a single division, Toyota, with the added beating coming later from Lexus and, recently, Scion. But effectively two divisions brought staggered GM and Ford while pushing Chrysler into the arms of Daimler.

That GM has eight divisions in the US alone is both nonsensical and unsustainable. Regrettably it seems that GM will be dragged on its knees and by the collar to that realization because it refuses to come to it while it is still standing with some semblance of dignity.

You cite Cadillac as an example of a successful GM division. Granted. That is because the division is focused on distinctive design and execution in the form of BMW or Mercedes. But do you really believe that there are eight ways to define the automobile? I don’t think so. While Cadillac is ostensibly focused on luxury and rear-drive performance it defies common sense to have both Buick and Saab which essentially make front-wheel drive sedans with different styles. Given Buick’s presence and potential in China it makes sense to keep that division while exiting Saab. GM did not even see fit to use Saab to produce the BLS. Why then is Saab still here especially when you consider the volumes they would have to sell to become profitable and the product and marketing expense required to get them there in the hypercompetitive bloodbath that is the near-luxury segment in which Saab resides? Why also do you even have Saturn? They make small, relatively inexpensive cars. Why can’t this division be eliminated and small cars be offered through both Chevy and Pontiac. The Saturn Aura for example would make a great entry-level Pontiac. The Sky convertible would do well as a Chevrolet. In actuality you should have one or the other convertible. It does not make sense to have two small convertibles anymore than it would fly at Mazda to have two basically badge engineered versions of the Miata.

Finally, why does GM not consolidate GMC truck with Hummer? Two separate truck divisions from a company that also sells SUVs throughout ALL of their remaining six divisions? That’s just inefficient and yet another example of how GM shoots itself in the foot, often with an automatic weapon. With GM down to Chevy, Pontiac, Buick, Cadillac and GMC truck you could better focus and define each division while still having nearly twice as many divisions as Toyota. Cadillac’s definition is clear. Buick could be your FWD near-luxury line with two (V6 and V8) sedans, a minivan and a coupe/convertible topped off with the rear-drive Grand National brought back as the division’s flagship. Pontiac would be your affordable sporty RWD/AWD division with a version of the Vibe to counter the Mitsubishi Evolution/Subaru WRX, a minivan (with standard AWD), two sporty rear-drive sedans and the GTO rear-drive coupe. Chevy would be your traditional portfolio of names (Corvette, Malibu, Impala etc.) and GMC Truck would be your defined body-on-frame work/semi-high end trucks which would include, now, a GMC Hummer H1, 2 or 3.

With each division thus defined GM could sharply focus and better spend its ad dollars.

Mr. Lutz,

How can you mention a commitment to performance for pontiac and then mention the Torrent. I have no problem with the derivative styling from the Equinox, and I would like to buy a higher performance version. This means something with class leading power, braking, and handling. For that there needs to be a higher performance engine than the 3400. That engine is fine for the Equinox, but how can you give the "performance" division a less powerful engine than you can get with a Saturn. What reason is there to buy a Pontiac when it has a price premium over a chevy, but there is no performance difference. I wanted to get a G6, but I didn't because the Malibu MAXX was thousands cheaper and performed exactly the same. For pontiac to be the performance division, the lowest pontiac must have at least the midlevel chevy engines and features.

GM needs more exciting products. There are far too few "gotta have it" products at GM priced under $50,000.

About 4 years back, I saw an excellent concept at the NY international Auto Show: a 2-door Pontiac Grand Prix that had been fitted with a small block V8 and all wheel drive ... probably the work of Jon Moss and crew, before Jon retired. I would have absolutely bought that car had it ever come to market. What a concept that thing was. There's nothing in the current product portfolio even close to it, with the exception of the overpriced GTO.

It's sad for me. I grew up a GM guy. My first new car was a '96 Impala SS, but these days, while GM offers nothing to suit my wallet and taste, there are plenty of models from other manufacturers available NOW that fit the bill. I can go over to DCX and get all the RWD sedan performance I can handle for under $40k (300C SRT-8), while all GM does is make empty promises or entice me with pie in the sky concept cars, such as that AWD V8 Grand Prix. With the recent scrapping of RWD platform development in favor of trucks and SUVs, it is sadly apparent to me that I'll have to write off buying another GM model for at least another decade. This s**ks.

No matter what GM division brings out as innovative (and some GM products truly are), each still has the same stale "persian bazaar" (including, sadly, Saturn) pushing the product, and weakly supported service departments frequently messing our cars up rather than repairing them.

Most of us don't throw out our cars every 2-3 years! And bad service experiences are a real turnoff for any brand!

So doesn't it make more sense to keep customers happy by offering good service at a fair price, so they will be inclined to buy your next vehicle offering?

Come on, Bob, show us that GM can be innovative with the _total_ vehicle experience!

Get serious about supporting service, and by all means keep up those clinics where customers can actually talk to engineers and give them real world feedback!

Mr. Lutz,

Make sure Pontiac gets some cohones, or it won't fly. Not just power, but tight handling, steering that communicates, manual transmissions. Make cars that look like they go fast standing still, without resorting to "spoilers."

Mr. Lutz -

I'm extremely disappointed GM won't be shedding any brands. They are absurdly redundant and do little but provide paychecks for hordes of middle managers. No other car company on earth has even half this many mainstream (non-niche) brands. It's killing GM. Your refusal to confront this speaks volumes of GM's continuing refusal to face up to its fundamental problems and address them. GM will never recover until somebody over there, at long last, comes to terms with market reality.

GM simply cannot afford to stock umpteen different brands with competitive products. No company could afford to do that. GM is like a diseased bush that will die unless it's pruned down.

I had confidence in you, but no more.

Mr. Lutz,

Thank you for the clarification. However, your reassurance alone is not enough in my mind to allay my fears that Buick may not make it as a brand.

Yes, GM has improved the models in the Buick stable. But that's not saying much when the cars that are replacing the Century, Regal, LeSabre, and Park Avenue, which have sat on the market for 6-9 seasons now with no change. And the replacements for these models use the same architecture as their predecessors. In the LaCrosse's case, its platform dates back to the Reagan administration. And the Lucerne's is, for 2006, 15 seasons old.

The new Lucerne and LaCrosse both exhibit styling that is, while attractive, derivative to say the least. They both look like they were styled by a designer who was too afraid to make them big, bold, powerful, and beautiful. Neither car has much design confidence.

Neither car has much power, either. In a day and age where the LaCrosse is competing with cars in size and price that have 260-plus horsepower standard, the Buick comes with 200, 240 optional. The LaCrosse's platform mates, the Impala and Grand Prix, are getting 303hp V8s next year, but the more expensive and supposedly prestigious Buick has to stick with 240. There would be less to complain about if the LaCrosse had debuted in 2002. But 2005? And it looks too much like a Taurus as it is.

The Lucerne is even more a case in point. The standard mill on this supposedly top-line luxurious Buick makes only 195hp. The 2005 Avalon makes more than that, not to mention the more powerful upcoming 2006 model. And 275hp, while better than nothing, isn't enough as an optional engine for a car that's bigger and more expensive than a 270hp Acura TL. And from a styling standpoint, it looks like the designers were afraid to make this Buick look big. Right now, it's a dead ringer for the Mercury Sable up front, and an Audi at the rear.

The Rendezvous needs updated styling, more standard power, and a better interior.

The Rainier needs a styling update as well (from the front doors back, it dates to 2002) and an interior that befits a $40,000 SUV. QuietTuning is nice, but it doesn't make an aging SUV with a poor interior compete with Lexus.

And the Terraza needs to be dumped or given a distinctive nose, taillights, and the upcoming 3.6 or 3.9 V6 as standard equipment. It's an outdated van that simply doesn't compete with its classmates. And Buick doesn't need a minivan, either.

Mr. Lutz, thank you for your effort to revitalize Buick. Much more effort is needed, though. Because even though there are additional models in the Buick line, nothing under the skin of any of these new Buicks is newer than your 2002 Oldsmobile SUV transplant.

Please don't be afraid to give Buick bold, powerful, beautiful styling, either.

I'm 22 years old. I've owned a Buick already. And I'd like to own more. Please bring out a product I'd be proud to own because it's the best there is out there. I'm waiting and hoping.

I know many of the posters are harping on the need for Rear Wheel Drive. I agree that a couple of solid RWD vehicles would be good additions across the GM line. However, I don't think most people really care. If GM wants to be competitive in the mid-size and smaller segment, FWD makes a lot of sense -- you get more interior room in a smaller, lighter car.

Bob,

The time has come to put up or shut up.

Each brand that you insist on saving needs definite clarification in the market place. Not many people on the street can tell you what a Pontiac or Buick is or even supposed to represent. They could maybe tell you what they used to be.... it's time to start listening to the customers (current/future) and moving faster.

GM blew it on the minivans. That much is painfully obvious. Let's not blow it on the next round of (potentially has been) pontiacs, buicks, saturns and saabs. People expect more than warmed over has-beens. It's time to pare the brands down to their original missions and skip on the nonsense. If (and I say if) Pontiac wants to be the performance division, tell the dealers they are getting performance cars, not rebadged minivans and Equinox's!! And Buick certainly doesn't need a minivan and a Trailblazer.

GM needs to find its brand identities and market them correctly. GM needs to sharpen each brand if you insist all are here for the long haul. Pare down the products into the segment leaders in each brands' mission.

It has to be done soon before the majority of GM non-distinct brands fade into oblivion!!!!

Bob,

Pontiac needs a better and more exciting SUV, the Torrent should have a more exciting body rather than a Chev Equinox body. The interior too is just an upgraded version of the Equinox. A Pontiac version should be something like the BMW X3. I don't mean Pontiac should copy BMW, but as least use BMW as a guide line or benchmark.
Wish Pontiac good luck with the Torrent.

Context is everything...

Context: Pronunciation: 'kän-"tekst
Function: noun
Etymology: Middle English, weaving together of words, from Latin contextus connection of words, coherence, from contexere to weave together, from com- + texere to weave --
1 : the parts of a discourse that surround a word or passage and can throw light on its meaning
2 : the interrelated conditions in which something exists or occurs.

How about content. Content customers, or excellent product content in your lineup.

You can't take the speculation of the public that Buick (boring) and Pontiac (boring, ugly and lacking) would be eliminated. It happened to Olds, the oldest vehicle manufacturer in the US. Why? There are at least two theories. 1. The product was so good that the customer would keep it for 10-12 years and not come back in a while, therefore profits suffered. 2. The product was redesigned and lacked content, it was boring and turned to compete with vehicles that have content, therefore customers were no longer content with Olds and bought elsewhere, profits suffered. I'll take the latter, bring back the content in your line up. Stop it with the SUV craze. Do your company a favor and have a shot, an attempt, a try at bringing back what GM once had. Content.

"This is not your father's Oldsmobile, this is the new generation of Olds." Hey, my father's Oldsmobile sold, produced, performed, outlasted and most in quality and durability. The new generation of Olds didn't last, spent more time at the dlr service department than on the road and was nothing more than a cheap Chevy with a re-badge job.

Cadillac is doing great, but you have to make Cadillac Money to afford a Cadillac Vehicle. Do for Pontiac, which is at this time, right now, the industry joke. It's sad that people are looking at Hyundai, Kia and Chrysler and turning their back on Pontiac. Bring down the prices. Aside from the Aveo, the average Joe working at the local grocery store, or Wal-Mart, can't afford anything else, and to buy an Aveo, you're better off buying a Hyundai, their warranty is better.

You're loosing many long time, some lifelong, loyal customers to not only Toyo and Honda, but to Hyundai, Kia, VW, Subaru (you still make money on those). These names may not be a direct threatening competitor to you, but they are taking, keeping and repeating sales from former GM owners. That leaves alot to desire.

Mo

Dear Mr. Lutz,
I disagree with many of your criticc. I do not think GM has too many brands. I think that is what gives GM a competitive edge. It is a marketer's dream to be able to sell roughly the same product multiple times by wrapping it a bit differently, and then selling it to a crowd that would not even consider the other variation. The problem lies with the execution. I can tell you why the G6, LaCrosse, Cobalt and CSVs are not runaway hits - I think it is quite obvious to most of the people writing and reading these blogs.

GM needs to stop taking all these shortcuts on vehicles and put out EXCELLENT products. I disagree with many of the comments that imply that Cadillac is safe. I've been to the Cadillac dealers and seen the products and none has yet tempted me out of my almost $4000 GM Card rebate despite the fact that I have bought 3 cars in the last 4 years. (If you want to talk, you can contact me anytime by the way.)

The Pontiac Solstice, Saturn Sky and Saturn Aura seem like they "may" be the first truly competitive cars that GM has produced in a long time, but those pesky final details and all important sticker prices will tell the truth. Good luck with them.

Thanks for listening.

PS. The Buick Lucerne is a BIG mistake and is not going to help - mark my words...

PPS. Its biggest problems are that the front end looks almost exactly like the outgoing Mercury Sable, it is way underpowered (at least on paper) against the competition, and it has absolutely no stand-out features except that (very nice) returning portholes.

Ok, I have a few things to say.

1. Your product is too expensive for the average American salary.

2. You're killing legendary names with your badging (SS, GTO).

3. You're not appealing to the masses, only to soccer moms and grandparents over 60.

4. Your product is too expensive for the average American salary.

5. Your quality, although improved, still needs improvement.

6. You have absolutely no competition for certain models out in the market today.

7. You're bringing out competition to certain products that have been on the market for way to long (PT Cruiser/HHR, Santa Fe/Equinox).

8. Your current corean Daewoo models might do great in Mexico and South America, but not in the US (Aveo).

9. Too many recalls, quality is lacking, all accross the board. Too many part delays (Malibu/MAXX, Cobalt, Aveo, Equinox, Pontiac GXP, GP, GTP, GTO).

10. You need less niche and more performance, durability.

Work on this.

Bob,

I happen to be one of the few people that own a 2005 GTO. All I can say is it's a great car. Of course some people, most of them have never driven one, criticize the design, but I continue to get positive comments from everyone, except some of those who post here. I beg you, please do not kill this car. The biggest problem is that no one gets to drive one. It only takes a few minutes behind the wheel and you want one, unless you're only interested in retro. I love the 400 HP, six gears and 24MPG on the highway. The car is great!!! And, I also own a 2002 BMW 330i, which I'm selling because I like the GOAT better!

So Bob, forget the press, get people into the drivers seat, but don't sell too many, I like having something special.

Bob,
I'm glad you clarified this. I know the media to overstate something somebody said and then go all over the map with it. I am a current owner of a Pontiac vehicle, as well as a Buick. GM's problems go beyond design and product. In fact, nobody normally says Toyotas, out of the box, are fast or good looking. I don't have to state how well they're selling. My Buick was recently recalled for a simple thing - to change a headlight bulb. I could have just gone out, bought a bulb and taken 5 minutes to pop it in. But no...the recall (I got repeated notices) required me to book an appointment and have the dealer take 2 hours to change it. Then I get a coupon to bring the car back some other day because Mr. Goodwrench didn't have time to clean up after themselves? I've since washed the car and cleaned the interior myself. Well intended processes but very sloppy execution. In the past, GM cars are well designed and engineered and I'm happy to say the execution or building of them has improved immensely. But if GM wants a full recovery and wants to be "the mark of excellence", that needs to be carried through from concept of design right to how GM takes care of their customers' ownership experience.

Good luck to you.

Mr. Lutz,

First I regret profusely not being at the Morgan Stanley Conference, like I was suppose to be (I got tied up on some work matters). I like to think I would have asked a follow up question to tone down the media reaction on the Pontiac/Buick comment. Sorry about that.

I think you guys are heading in the right direction on your brands. I am convinced that the UAW has to accept a new health care policy that will lower costs (I just wrote an article for my hometown paper in Ohio that will turn some heads at the Lordstown plant).

I want GM to make it. I especially want Pontiac to make it. Therefore, I think I have to put my money where my mouth is. When I trade in my Grand Am, I will most likely buy a G6, Solstice, or maybe the GP GXP. I love the Acura TL, but its time to help the General.

Eric

p.s. Can I have an email address, to send you a copy of the Article I wrote?

Dear Mr. Lutz:

FWIW, in over thirty years of driving I've never owned a domestic product, save for one Reliant we got from my mother when she stopped driving. That said, I'd consider one if it were the superior product. Problem is, they never seem to be.

May I suggest that GM adopt a variation of the GE concept of "if we can't be first or second in that venue, then we should get out."

GM should stop putting out mediocrities - if a particular GM model isn't industry leading, or at least world class - BY EVERY MEASURE OF COMPARISON - then it shouldn't go into production. Every mediocre to poor product that GM produces (which seems to be the majority) taints all the rest.

Exterior design, interiors, performance, safety and reliability should all AT LEAST be world class. Then the halo effect will kick in.

In the meantime, I'm sticking with European products due to their superior safety, particulary as regards roof structures.

What a relief that you are committed to Buick and Pontiac, this is not the time for GM to retreat. You are still #1 after all of this because of your brands. Ford for example can not sell more than a million of its F-150's in a year because it is too prevalent in the marketplace. If everyone has one who is going to want one?

I have two suggestions for you.

1. Launch Opel in California.

Just like Toyota did with Scion. Perfect market for its cars with high fuel prices and GM's market share the lowest there of any state. Also, Opel does not have the stigma associated with GM's domestic brands. Let Opel have California and then see from there.

2. Watching so many people respond to GM in blogs in various sites I hope you realize how important and loved your company and products are to so many. I don't think any other automobile company or any company has such a following. I think you should use blogs in your marketing. It would be the hippist adds out there and would reflect how much more interesting GM is compared to the plain vanilla world of the rest of the auto industry.

May God Save the Neapolitan.

What a brutal month. GM is making better cars, design is looking better, interior is improved, JD Power ratings have improved. But sales are down. GM marketing needs to be bold. GM needs advertisements that people will remember. GM advertises like a wholesale market like a furniture store ad. There is always a sale going on. They advertise the price not the car! Tell us more about the car show us nice interior tell us more about the content. Show us the ONstar inside the car.

GM advertisement leaves an impression of a company which is not sure of itself. Where is the confidence where is the leadership in the market? It revived Cadillac, so it can cerainly design cars. Why not build an appeal. When asked people what does GM stand for? They come out empty. Can you not change that image? Why your advertisements do not appeal young buyers. Why use a old song to revive Cadillac? What more does GM have to loose before GM will take a bold position in the marketplace?

Bob,

I just finished listening to your presentation to the Morgan Stanley Conference last week at http://media.gm.com. There is no doubt in my mind that the media took what you said completely out of context.

I find it shocking that not a single media outlet bothered to chronicle the strategy you laid out, which by the way, gives me great confidence that it is just a matter of time before things begin to look up for GM.

One more thought on context:

I remember the declaration that the "new" Chevy Malibu/Maxx would "not" be offered to rental car fleets (the "classic" was to handle that).

Surprise! The new Malibu/Maxx is now apparently being offered to rental fleets, and the "classic" is apparently no more.

I fully understand and recognize the reasons behind sometimes having to change business strageties. But making strong declarations about GM products, and then quietly abandoning them, does nothing to help inspire confidence in the brand.

Bob,

I am glad to see that you are defending both Pontiac and Buick. The words "reignite Pontiac's muscular design and street credibility" are most encouraging to all of us Pontiac fans.

I have a Pontiac design question. Is the Pontiac signature grill hindering the design of the car? The grill configuration looks very dated when you apply it to new cars. Is tradition getting in the way of design innovation?

I'm glad you're speaking up regarding the press.

Press/media in so many things in our world these days simply creates 'news' for shock value to keep their own jobs.

So it will always be a war to fight that.

Regarding Buick and Pontiac, there's lots to do, but as far Pontiac, Chevy, and Buick cars, you could start by ditching the ancient v6's and simply making the new high feature v6's the standard v6's across the board. The customer doesn't care if your ancient tooling for those old motors is paid for.

And RWD is no savior, but would help fill out the lines. Making AWD available on many cars would help a lot more.

A Camaro is not a savior either, but would provide some good press and fan following.

Just stop cheaping out on everything, and enough with the uninteresting or half baked designs. Invest in design, execute design and performance without being so friggin cheap all the time. And add some thoughtfulness and user freindliness into your products. Example, more nice ideas like the flip forward seat bottom on the 06 Impala. Very nice. But then the HHR lacks the nifty pull out seats of the PT Cruiser. What's the deal there?

And while I'm harping on the HHR, its dash ought to be more like the show car Nomad's and less like a second degree PT Cruiser knockoff.

Bob: If divisions were closed, where would buyers go? Now that Olds is completely dead, are buyers shopping Buick instead? Here's my point, division by division:

CHEVY - PONTIAC - SATURN:
If you kept only Chevy would Pontiac and Saturn buyers shop at Ford, DCX or one of the foreign brands? You might loose some, but this might be a good move.

OLDS - BUICK
I assume that GM calculated that when Olds closed, many buyers would switch to Buick. Did this happen?

CADILLAC
This can not be closed. The brand is doing very well. If it was closed, most would have nowhere to go but Lincoln. Another point: how would the President get around and how would the rest of us take our "final ride" to the cemetery? Just kidding! Strict rule... no badge engineering with this brand.

CHEVY TRUCKS - GMC:
Aside from commercial vehicles, most buyers would buy a CHEVY Suburban instead of a GMC... or a TrailBlazer instead of an Envoy. Keep GMC commercial only. Cut marketing costs!

Saab: An original brand that GM has watered down. For god sakes, a 9-7? Spin it how you want, but it's just a TrailBlazer with the ignition between the seats. What's next, an Aveo with a Saab nose called a 9-1 starting at $20K?

I would keep: Chevy, Buick, Caddy, and Saab. Hummer may be macho, but if it does not make a profit, then dump that one too.

Wake up and realize that it is not 1975... Look at all the new brands/extensions. Lexus, Infiniti, Acura, Hyundai and Suzuki. Look at the emergence of luxury/performance cars from Audi, BMW and Volvo. The world has changed and you have not.

One more thing… stop blaming the MASS MEDIA. Sometimes they are not wrong!

Bob,

There's one one way to save GM from eventual destruction - kill off excess brands. GM needs 3 brands - 1.)Cadillac, to deal with the usual suspects; 2.)Chevrolet, to compete with Ford/Honda/Toyota and all of the trucks/vans, and 3.) Saturn or Pontiac, to take on the pre-luxury/sporty range like VW/Volvo. Why do you need Buick when you have Cadillac? Some Caddy's can be smooth while others can be more sport (see Lexus). How can the Impala/GP/LaCross compete with an Accord when development money has to be split on different exterior designs and interiors? Why can't all of the brands have the 2.8/3.6L DOHC V6 engines (not just the high-end cars)- Nissan has it's 3.5L in everything from the Altima to the upcoming M35. And please - NO MORE 4-SPD AUTOS!

I will always try to buy products designed and built by my fellow citizens, and at age 30, I have a lot of buying left to do. Currently, though, there is nothing from GM (other than the Corvette, Caddys, and possibly loaded-Cobalt) which I can get excited about.

Why is Saturn always one of the car brands on the block. That's one division that has something really hard to get in today's economy, brand loyalty. And if you kill off Saturn, those buyers arn't going to shop at pontiac, they'll switch back to an import brand.

Mr. Lutz,

If you want people to react to your claims that the quality and reliability of GM vehicles is there, then prove it to them... Make the standard vehicle warranty at least 5 years for all GM cars. If they trully are better then you shouldn't have anything to lose by doing it, on the contrary... you might actually convince ME.

Hi Bob,
I am certainly happy to hear this and am tired of the media always praising the Japanese (Especially Toyota) for everything they do. It will be scary to see if Malcolm Bricklin's "Chery" brand will get such positive hype while GM gets dragged through the gutter. It is unfortunate that through the '80s and '90s GM squeezed every last dollar out of what they made and now you are the guy responsible for changing it all. I think GM has done an unbelievable job in the last 6 years!

Some of my fears though are, Why push more trucks and SUV's when oil prices are on the rise? Every day people complain at the pump which could eventually make us consumers buy econo-cars instead of gas guzzlers. Myself, I drive a 2002 Silverado and I hate filling her up. We want performance, with a nice sounding exhaust, that gets 30mpg+. GM needs a competitor to the Mustang and Charger...but will that take 5 years like the competitor to the PT Cruiser took in the HHR??

Please keep up the great work, and don't worry, the fans on the streets are working on their family and friends in "Buying American"...I convinced my Dad after 15 yrs with Honda to buy a Trailblazer and he couldn't be happier now!

Mr. Lutz,

Thank you for having a blog.

I disagree with the brand consolidation in some of the recent post. GM needs all it brands. What it may need is some model consolidation. Does every brand, except Cadillac, need a re-badged mini van or Trailbalzer? I’m sure the dealers all want them, but at what expense?

Here are some model consolidation ideas I’m sure the dealers would hate:

CHEVY TRUCKS – GMC
Give one brand all the pickup trucks and the other all the SUVs.

SATURN
Entry level cars only. Three or for models to compete against Kia and Hyundai.

CHEVERLOT
This should primarily be the entry level or base sedan brand. Keep the Cobalt, Malibu and Impala. The mini van can stay here or go to the SUV brand. Move the Monte Carlo to Pontiac and the G6 to Chevrolet. The Corvette is an exception to the brands sedan identity. No new Camero (see Pontiac).

PONTIAC
Coupes only, this is your “excitement” brand. No SUVs, no mini vans. Redesign the Monte Carlo and call it the Gran Prix. The Solstice is a great addition. Work on the GTO’s design or ditch it. One more “excitement” model is needed, maybe a new RWD Firebird?

BUICK
This is the entry level luxury sedan brand. No SUVs, no mini vans. The LaCrosse and the Lucerne are good. Two more models are needed. Hopefully RWD/AWD Lexus killers.

CADILLAC
Every thing is good here for now.

SAAB
No SUVs. Make SAABs like SAABs.

HUMMER
Clique brand whose market may already be saturated. Wait and see.

Other than bankruptcy, I doubt there is anything that will change the GM mentality towards badge engineering.

Bob,
The press is more than warranted. GM leads the class of bumbling fools. Again, this month sales numbers are released and again YOU are down while Toyota, Honda and Nissan are up significantly. This company and management deserve the scrutiny. And, indeed it is accurate. If any inaccuracies are to be quoted, they are around your statements at the auto show where you remarked that brands may be in jeopardy if sales don't pick up.

What appears to have happened is a lack of clarity in the senior management's position on this topic so you got your hands slapped for making an accurate and honest comment. Another key indicator that GM is managed like the corner 7-11. Make that the American 7-11s. The Japanese 7-11's are so clean and well run you could eat off the floor.

Dear Mr. Lutz and fellow bloggers,

I'd like to thank you for this opportunity to share opinions. I'm surprised, but fortified, by the frank exchange.

Many have made important observations and recommendations about press coverage and product development. Here are a few that I share (apologies for repitition):

1. Press - I think it is counterproductive to criticize the press like this (even in those instances when there might be a real grievance). It comes off badly and only increases tensions. It is much better to give them positive things to write about. They may discount optimistic/positive comments, but they will report that those comments were made.

Product - I like GM products, I even owned a used 1987 Buick Century (fwd) in college. It was kind of ugly and not very sophisticated, but it was bulletproof and got great gas mileage. I even towed an overloaded U-Haul trailer 2000 miles from Texas to Connecticut - with a 2.5 liter, iron-block four cylinder engine that already had 135,000 miles on it!

So, I'm not an import snob. And, I think proven technology (i.e., older technology) can be quite satisfying. But, I do think that GM needs to stop trying so hard to differentiate its makes and model versions by using OHV engines for "lesser" makes/versions. I agree with the comments in another posting that the 3800 Gen III OHV engine - a classic that's also bulletproof - has no business being in the Lucerne, and I wonder if it should even be in the LaCrosse. Are there not manufacturing savings to be gained by offering fewer engines, even if the ones retained cost more per unit? I'm sure it is not so easy to just drop the 3800 and build more of the 3.6 OHC engines because of factory capacity. Still, Nissan is instructive here: it basically offers only 3 (maybe four) engines: 1 or 2 four cylinders, 1 V6 and one V8. Yet nobody worries that their Infiniti G35 is cheapened by the fact that you can get the same engine (with different tuning) in the Altima or Maxima.

Coupes and convertibles - On this point I wonder if Mr. Lutz's personal preference for coupes and convertibles might be a little misplaced. The convertible market had one of its best years last year, but still fewer than 350,000 were sold across more than a dozen models. I'm sorry to say that I do not think that the Solstice and the Saturn version are wise investments. I suppose the car mags love to cover them, so there might be some halo effect there. But, is there not another type of vehicle that could achieve the same exposure for a rebuilding brand?

New model launches - I agree with Mr. Lutz that the declarations of failure for the G6 and LaCrosse are premature. It takes more than half a year for most new cars to gain traction in the market. Yes, a very small number of cars achieve "break-out" status. But, it will always be only 1 or 2 at any given time. That's what it means to be a "break-out." GM could (and should) have one of those break-outs, but it no company will ever have more than one or two at a given time. Recommendation: make the next RWD large Buick look like the Mazerati Quattroporte (idea stolen from one of the car buff mags).

I think it would help to eliminate some brands or at least so many models. Mr Lutz I know your exec team has talked about the model saturation problem. You have to know you have too many to models to support properly. I don't envy you, but cutting staff and management is gonna help. You should also really consider combining some of the best features of the differnet brands. GMC/Chevy trucks & Vans just needs to be merged under the Chevy name. If you do get rid of brands, I say Buick and Saturn.

IMHO here are the cars GM should keep:

2 Door Sport/Coupes:
Chevy Cobalt/ Saturn Ion Coupe - Merge
Corvette
Pontiac GTO

Sport Convertibles:
Cadillac XLR
Corvette
Solstice
SSR
Saab 9-3

4 Door Sedans
Buick LaCrosse/Pontiac Grand Prix/Chevy Impala - Merge
Buick Park Avenue/Bonnevile - Merge
Cadillac CTS/STS/Deville
Pontiac G6/Saturn Ion Sedan - Merge
Pontiac Vibe/Saab 9-2 - Merge
Saab 9-3/9-5

Suv's
Chevy Equinox
Saturn Vue
Chevy Trailbalzer
Chevy Avalanche
Chevy/GMC Tahoe/Denalli - Merge
Chevy/GMC Suburban - Merge
Hummer H1/H2/H3
Saab 9-7

MiniVans/Passenger/Cargo Vans:
Buick Terraza/Chevy Uplander/Saturn Relay - Merge
Chevy Venture/Pontiac Montana - Merge
Chevy/GMC Cargo - Merge
Chevy/GMC Passenger - Merge

Pickups:
Chevy/GMC - Canyon/Colorado - Merge
Chevy/GMC - Silverado/Sierra -Merge

GM Brands

Chevrolet - Family Model Cars,Trucks, MiniVans, Suv's, + Corvette
Pontiac - Premium Sport/Performance Cars,
Cadillac - Luxury Sport/Performance Models
Saab - Euro Brand Premium Sport/Performance Models
Hummer - Hummers + Heavy Duty 2500/3500 Level PU's, Suv's, Passenger Vans

Dear Mr. Lutz:
The more I research GM (including reading these blogs), the more depressed I get about its future.

Don't you realize that the business model is broken? Yes, you are improving things. But you're improving a business model designed in the 20th century.

Its time to change things. You are 73 years old. You don't have to worry about the career ramifications of making unpopular decisions. Many of the new products are either doomed from the beginning (a Saab Trailblazer for pete's sake!) or overshadowed by the dogs of the line (like the minivans).

Make the tough decisions that will scale down and transform the company into a viable operation for the 21st century. Cut the losing brands, consolidate the product line, and close the extra dealers.

The American way is to adapt to changing circumstances and make the decisions that will allow a company to prosper. If some of the entrenched GM cronies suffer as a result, then too bad. It is necessary for the greater good.

Save the company. Make it smaller. Because if you don't, someone else will. And that someone else will most certainly not be a GM employee. And probably not an American, either.

Sincerely,
Matt D from Kansas

F-BODY!!

Honestly Mr. Lutz, I am not sure what type of market any of your brands are attempting to cater to. If you look at todays economy, i.e. GAS PRICES, you will notice things are on the rise...and you plan to market bigger and better suv's and trucks?? Time to step outta the clouds and join us here on earth in present times.

"And while I'm harping on the HHR, its dash ought to be more like the show car Nomad's and less like a second degree PT Cruiser knockoff."

It ought to be the show car Nomad period.

Mr. Lutz:

General Motors is a lighting rod of negative press. I believe part of the reason is that the press that has an anti-American bias. General Motors is an American icon, therefore it is a preferred target of a press with anti-American feelings.

I think the proof of my statement is the deferential treatment the press gave Honda during its corporate scandal of the 1990s, as documented in Steve Lynch’s book, “Arrogance and Accords.” Eighteen Honda executives were convicted for Federal fraud and racketeering charges in one of the largest commercial corruption cases in U.S. history. The American public is largely unaware of this case.

If General Motors executives committed crimes like the Honda executives did, the press would have crucified General Motors. The case would be common knowledge because of the extensive press coverage.

Respectfully,

Eric M. Vest

People! The man said he ain't planning to kill anything yet. Now Im sick of hearing "well I don't like or understand why anyone would buy Saturn over pontiac, So lets Kill saturn."

Instead lets focus on why people like Honda, Ford, BMW, and tell the man what they want to see from those brands in GM brands!

In a related story, "GM: It's Worse Than You Thought"*, Jerry Flint speculated that the $2 billion payout to Fiat was part of the reason the Zeta platform was cancelled. Are you able to comment, perhaps a future post, if it was this or other factors that led to this decision?

*URL for "GM: It's Worse Than You Thought"
http://www.forbes.com/columnists/2005/03/25/cz_jf_0325flint.html?partner=rss

Mr. Lutz,

You're talking the talk again. Now tell us how you're planning to walk the talk. Give us "the customers" an idea of what the line up will be in '06 and '07. Is the GTO to be redesigned and given enough umph to challenge the GT500 Shelby Cobra? Will the Chrysler 300C have more hp than the GTO? What about Camaro? How many of these do you think you'd have sold this year if you had done a "Mustang" type job on the car? TELL US WHAT YOU'RE GOING TO DO! If you can't back your talk don't expect we "the customers" to buy GM when your competitors are ready and eager to put a high-performance, great looking car in our garage!

Is tomorrow too soon to let us know what's in the line-up?

I know this post is long, but I need to get this out. I understand the heartache and uproar that went with eliminating Oldsmobile, but GM needs to streamline if it wants to remain ahead of its competitors. Here’s my North American plan for GM to survive:

Chevrolet – Keep it
------------------------
Chevy is the foundation of GM. It should have a full line of cars and trucks, especially the lower end models. It should also have GM’s only minivan, so make it good. SS models are more than welcome; just make sure they live up to the name.
Astro: Let it die.
Aveo: Keep it dirt-cheap.
Camaro/Chevelle: 2-door RWD
Cobalt: Shows promise.
Commercial Vehicles: You need these.
Corvette: It’s great. Don’t mess with it.
Express: Keep it.
HHR: It’s a copycat, but I like it.
Impala: 4-door V8 RWD
Malibu: Replace with the Saturn Aura.
Malibu Maxx: Make an Aura 5-door.
Monte Carlo: Kill it.
Nomad: Kappa-based 2+2 coupe.
Pickups: Keep them all.
Sky: Make the Saturn a Chevy.
SSR: Drop the price $10K or kill it.
SUVs: Keep them all.
Uplander: Fix the pig nose.

Pontiac – Keep it
----------------------
Honestly make this the performance division. That said, you don’t need a minivan or a full-sized family hauler. Make sure the hot small cars are available under $20K.
Aztek: Kill it and burn all records
Bonneville: Kill it
G6: Let people see all the body styles
Grand Am: Let it die
Grand Prix: 4-door RWD
GTO: Properly styled, 450hp, 2-door RWD
Montana: No
Solstice: I want the hot-rod version
Sunfire: Already dead
Torrent: Make it, but make it perform
Vibe: Replace with 3 & 5 door Opel Astras

GMC – Keep it
------------------
Since America wants trucks, make this the division for high-end pickups and SUVs. Since there are plenty of people who want trucks that are both truly heavy-duty and luxurious (to pull horse trailers, race car trailers, etc.) make sure they are available in 3/4 and 1-ton versions, and make them all as decked out as the Denali versions. Leave all the stripped-down "work truck" versions to Chevrolet and help build up the GMC brand. And yes, let the XUV die.

Cadillac – Keep it
-----------------------
Keep the RWD cars and make a geezer-equipped version (whatever that means) of the STS to take the place of the DTS. The SRX fits as a Cadillac SUV, but kill off the various Escalade versions. Yeah, they're selling great now, but they're a fad. As soon as the rappers find something new, you won't be able to get rid of them. The XLR is good, and make a V-series for everything. Once the company is on its feet again, then aim for a Sixteen.

Buick – Kill it
--------------------
The people that buy Buicks will be dead soon anyway. Cadillac needs to compete with Lexus, not Buick.

Saturn – Kill it
---------------------
Make *ALL* GM dealers treat their customers well. I've already redistributed the models worth keeping.

Hummer – Kill it
---------------------
Actually, let AM General continue with the H1 for its niche market. The H2 is silly. As far as the H3 goes, Jeep has a lock on the off-road market. Concede that one.

Saab – Kill it or sell it
------------------------------
I hate to see Saab go, but GM’s already removed all of its Saab-ness and turned it into a badge-engineered division. Either sell it or let it die with some dignity.

For all the remaining divisions, sprinkle in the hybrid and diesel engines as they make sense to please the public and improve the CAFE numbers. Make sure the quality and styling are where they need to be. (If you don't have as many versions of each car, you don't have to stick any brand with the ugly looking one.) Keep the option packages simple to reduce build complexity and probably give customers more stuff for a lower price.

This plan won’t make everybody happy, but Toyota doesn’t have to support all these divisions. I have a vested interest in seeing GM succeed. Please help it do so.

I understand that PR is a week spot at GM. I thought of some things.
Why isn't warranty offered as an alternative to incentives(5000$ or a 1 and 1/2 yrs extended waranty)? Retail value would increase.

Wouldn't be good if H1 would be offered with optional hybrid powertrains? Not many would be sold so not many losses would result but it would do good for Hummer's image.

GM is offering healthcare for 1.1 mil retirees and active workers. Would it worth starting a healthcare business considering a 3 mil. customers base (relatives added)? I understood that health-care bussiness is very profitable.

At the end ...I am aware of being a little off topic and I want to apologize...but I wanted to share some of my thoughts (Maybe they are worth something...I hope.)

FROM GOOD TO GREAT...

Mr. Lutz,
Winston Churchill once said '..If you stop to throw stones at all the barking dogs, you'll never reach your destination.' Or something to that effect.

GM's quest in this industry must always be to go 'From Good To Great' in styling, quality, reliability and affordability to the average person. That is, the most people.

Get our entire team to focus on being the best at these things, keeping it as simple as possible, and success will follow.

Brian Hemphill, Canadian GM dealer

Mr Lutz

Be carefull with the words ,you should no it ...

Best Reguards

G'day,

I thought, you might be interested in some of my trials & tribulations concerning divisions of GM.

I tried tobuy a Corvette back in SEP 04. After 7 weeks Chevy still could not place my order. This meant it would be another 4 weeks at leaste before the order could go in. I pulled my deposit.

I then went back to my original car: Saturn Red Line.

The dealer got the order in within 2 weeks. The Saturn decided not to build any more Ions/Red Lines for going on 3 months. A comparable Red Line was found within 200 miles of where I live.

I ended up taking it and going to pick it up and drive it to the dealership myself.

GM might sell more cars if the build the ones which are ordered.

Getting another GM vehicle in 4 years is very questionable.

Thank you

As someone who was standing in the room when the comments were made I would have to say that they didn't misquote you Bob and frankly you told the truth (even if you did not intend to).

The only successful car companies in the world are working with 3 or less brands.

You think it's coincidental that Nissan, Toyota, Honda, BMW, Peugeot, Renault, and Hyundai are succesful while GM, Ford, DCX, Fiat, and VW are struggling?

My faith in GM's management has fallen to an all-time low. Only one way you can restore it.

Tell me how on a $8 billion CAPEX budget you are going to feed 8 US brands as well as all the world brands? And dont say platform sharing and efficiency. For example, 6 versions of the GMT-360? O I forgot, the Bravada is dead, 5, shoulda been a Buick, if anything, from day one anyways. Everyone else is doing the same things (efficiency, platform sharing, etc.) and spending the same while any scale advantage has been shrinking quickly.

That (spending comparable amounts on a % of sales basis while maintaining more brands and more entries) implies you have to permanently better than EVERYONE else at designing, engineering, and building vehicles. You are not and can not be better than everyone else all the time.

You guys are in denial and unfortunately it looks like the only thing that will change it is a strike (to break the union and buy you some time to fix this mess) or bankruptcy (same effect different route).

I don't have a problem dropping Buick. With sales so low, not many people will miss it. Maybe there is some way to keep the brand, but re-apportion the models. But the way things are now, it seems very confusing.

I drive a Corvette, and would willingly buy a new C6, but not when Ford is going to offer 450+ horsepower in a Mustang. And with the GTO and a CTS model using the Corvette engine, more future Cadillacs and SUVs/trucks using "my" engine and a coming supercharged 440HP Cadillac, I wonder where GM's the performance head is. Frankly, I feel betrayed. Yes, I know about power/weight ratios, but Corvette drivers don't buy the vehicle to be bothered by others. You can simply enjoy driving, but that's going to change if other GM products, not to mention Ford's, are able enter Corvette territory.

If the ZO6 engine was available in the Corvette coupe and convertible, this would be a mute point...for now. There is a covenant of sorts between GM and Corvette buyers. We expect GM to provide us with a vehicle that is well ahead of the competition. I now question GM's commitment to doing so.

That's one point. The other is what you do with Pontiac and Buick. Frankly, I don't know. If Pontiac is to be the performance brand, you don't need 400 or more horsepower at Chevrolet and Cadillac...simply move the Corvette to Pontiac...the new Firebird? Is Buick to be an upscale Chevrolet or a downscale Cadillac? Maybe you combine Buick and Pontiac and offer more refinement and performance than Chevrolet. If there isn't a clear difference, you end up with a Ford/Mercury situation...came vehicle, different look.

In summary, just give me the ZO6 drivetrain in a coupe and I'll be happy.

Thanks for re-assuring us that things aren't as bad as they seem. Umm ... will CEO Wagoner be taking over the blogging, too?

i still have faith in GM,...and i think that you are on the right track for the most part. just keep overhauling GM and NEVER forget that the average joe made GM in the 60s because anything he bought in his price range made him feel like he was getting the best he could get and not just settling for what he could afford.

Bob:

Too bad. Gm should be shedding some of the dead weight. Very discouraging to see that management still lacks backbone. Will any of the people at your level who okay these disasters (like the new minivans, the hideous Malibu, the dull G6,...) pay for your poor decisions? Or will you continue to blame healthcare costs, the union, the media,etc... for your self-inflicted wounds?

Dear Mr. Lutz:

It is a sad testimonial that an honest man like yourself who finds himself in the public eye has to surround himself with an armada of lawyers and P.R. folks, lest he be eaten alive. Please, just keep doing what you are doing.

I don't believe that the general public has become confused by the plethora of GM brands; they aren't any dumber now than they were years ago. It is my belief that if you can return GM to its former glory, all such concerns will be mute.

You can do that by providing a variety of products; not just the same one re-badged ad nauseum. I once had a Japanese pickup whose highway fuel mileage was in the mid-30s using old technologies (e.g. a carburator, leaf springs, fluid shocks, etc.). If GM could do something like that with today's technologies, it would really make them standout against all of those manufacturers making these huge barns on wheels that guzzle gas like there's no tomorrow.

Mr. Lutz, if you are listening (most of my submissions seem to have gotten tossed into the trash), nobody sells a small truck anymore; maybe GM could snag this market. A "more of the same" mindset won't allow GM to differentiate itself from Daimler/Chrysler and Ford who have their own mediocre offerings.

With 300 Billion in Medical and unfunded retirement liability, I would replace the bean-counters you are in the process of laying off with some designers stolen shamelessly from Chrysler. Perhaps they will mistakenly pick up some of the Aztec team.

Although some of your more upacale cars might have a chance since BMW is seemingly driving its design off a cliff.

Mr. Lutz,

Like the others here, I'm glad to see that you're blogging as well - keeping in touch with your customers is tough, especially when they don't always have the nicest of things to say.

I know that you're a car guy from way back, and upon hearing about your new post, I couldn't help but think that GM did both you and the company a favor by allowing you to focus on product. Let someone else count the beans for a while.

Best of luck on in your new position.

I was pleased to read about the management changes. While some may say that one of GM's biggest weaknesses is having too many Finance people running things (and not enough car enthusiasts), at this stage of the game, putting Wagoner (a Finance guy) at the top of GM North America is an excellent choice. That way, Bob Lutz doesn't have to bear the burden of cutting brands and closing factories. Let the bean counter do it instead. Now you can focus more on what you do best--being the "car guy."

Here's a thought that will probably never happen:

Make Corvette its own separate franchise, and only allow some dealerships to sell them. There are some really tacky, old Chevy facilities out there that have no business selling a $50k car. Only allow Chevy dealers with newer facilites, and who are willing to dedicate a specific area of the showroom to Corvette, to sell it. After all, if I'm buying a Corvette, I don't want to mix with the "rif-raf" looking at Aveos and Malibus. And it sure doesn't help Corvette's image to be paired with those cars in the showroom.

If not every Chevy dealer sold Vettes, then volume would go up for those who do. Therefore, some high-volume Corvette dealers might even build separate showrooms just for Corvette. Picture a showroom with a coupe, a convertible, and a Z06 on display, color option displays, a Magnetic Ride option display, nice lighting (like at new Cadillac showrooms), nice signage, and a few Vettes parked out front. It doesn't have to be a huge building, and service facilites could still be shared with the main Chevy facility.

GM should also offer a Cadillac-like 4/50 warranty on the Vette. It's ridiculous that they don't.

I also beg of GM: in your new franchise agreements, please mandate that your dealerships be allowed to fly no more than one American flag at a time. The flags at car dealerships are out of control and tacky, and they cheapen Old Glory.

Bob,

Driving home last night in my '96 SAAB 900SE (fun handling, but not enough low end torque), I had a bit of an epiphany. I have to warn you the following idea is certainly outside the box, and may be too daunting of an engineering/financial challenge. However, I think successful results could be both exciting and rewarding.

The idea is to rejuvinate Buick by adding excitement to the dealerships by crossing over to a radically different market, but one that though they can afford Buicks, probably does not consider them often.

I am suggesting GM design, manufacture, and market a motorcycle by Buick that would compete with Honda STS and BMW motorcylces for the touring segment.

Almost by definition a motorcycle would add excitement to Buick. Imagine the semi-embarrassed youth who wanders into a Buick dealership today (perhaps he liked but has outgrown a hand-me-down from his Dad?). A motorcycle may erase his embarrassment by enhancing Buick's Cool.

If you can do a really smooth motorcycle with hard bags and some signature sound (not like the Japanese lawnmowers) for ~$10k you would get a unique and powerful Halo effect. Imagine the press!

The Buick name for reliability and smoothness would be good for the bike, while a bike would be good for Buick.

I bet the challenge of producing a motorcycle on the same line as a car would get some bright engineers fired up, and pay big dividends for reducing other 'badge engineering' constraints.

A crazy pipe dream, I know. Too much thinking inside the box is not going to get you the home runs you need, though.

Diane's comments ("GM is not giving people "excitement" with their driving experience anymore, unless you can spend some major money" and "GM needs to be America's Car Company again")are dead on. GM should take a page from the success of Wal-Mart or, better yet, Target. GM will only thrive again when it provides EXCITEMENT and VALUE to its customers.

One suggestion: GM's employee discount plan should be changed for all product development personnel. GM should subsidize the purchase or lease of best-in-class automobiles made by its competitors. Driving Hondas and Toyotas every day might make GM better appreciate what those products have to offer and might better highlight were GM's vehicles are lacking.

I'm not saying GM makes bad vehicles. But once someone's been driving a Honda or Toyota (and lots of people are driving them these days), its simply hard to get someone to switch back.

Danny has a good point. When I was at GM I always argued the employee purchase plan was a horrible thing as it isolated everyone from the competition. I know you guys tear them down (I have been through the place numerous times), but maybe you ought to drive them for 6 months instead.

Regarding the comment above about GM manufacturing/outsourcing a motorcycle and selling it at GM dealerships ... I'm all for it! Just please, God, don't let the Teutul's (Orange County Choppers) have anything to do with it!

Grab your inspiration for motorcycle design (if GM is going to attempt to do this on its own) from BMW, Ducati, Moto Guzzi, Aprilia, Benelli, Triumph and KTM.

Better yet, I have another motorcycle-related question ... GM owns a portion of Suzuki, correct? Then why do I always see Kawasaki's advertised along with Chevy Trucks? That makes no sense! Suzuki is known amoung the big four Japanese manufacturers as producing the best sport bikes in the world. Why not add to Pontiac's street cred by positioning Suzuki sportbikes in the dealer showrooms next to the cars?

What's that? Do I hear calls for a Pontiac-badged GSX-R1000? `;)

I just wanted to comment on Keith's and Gustav's comments, regarding GM getting into the motorcycle business. There are pros and cons to everything, however, I don't see how GM can accomplish this, nor how consumers would take it.

I am a biker, I have been riding for over 12 years and will continue to do so, God permitting. The idea is a good one, but considering all the problems, recalls, mistakes and design flaws found in GM vehicles, and don't get me wrong, I love many GM vehicles, would you want to have a GM bike, that may have the same quality issues? These are 2 wheels, not 4.

First, you would have to develop a dealer base, for service, not just sales. Motorcylces are complex machines, a car technicia or mechanic can't work on a bike without the proper training, cars and bikes have similarities, but they are not the same.

Second, manufacturing, GM can't do a rebadge with the Suzuki affiliation. Motorcyclists, bikers, whatever you want to call us, are very much into the motorcycles, from performance, design, options and mechanical capabilities, bikers/riders like unique products, furthermore, they know their product. You can't fool a motorcyclist into thinking something is new and unique with a rebadge of a Suzuki. Harley-Davidson, Victory (Polaris), Excelsior-Henderson and Indian are the current American Motorcycle Manufacturers. It has taken ages of R & D, innovations and building a customer base for these Amrican motorcycle companies to survive, and they have gone through some serious restructuring, even closing at times and re-opening. Victory is the most recent entry, but they are a division of Polaris, which concentrates in 4 wheelers, snow mobiles, jet skis and motorcycles. All Cycle-eske products. You can't knock down on the Japanese manufacturers, whether Harley owners want to admit it or not, the japanese bike manufacturers currently have the best products out there when it comes to bikes. Cruisers and street bikes alike.

Third, warranty costs. Most new bikes have a one year factory warranty, that's because it is rare that the manufacturer uses their warranty dollars, as the product is high in quality, durability and performance.

Fourth, market. Go to any bike rally, large or small, and ask randomly, to all ages, groups, races and bike type enthusiast, how many of them would purchase a bike manufactured by GM. If you get one, it will be a collector of rare bikes, or a hard core GM fan.

Fifth, quality and product. Can GM build a motorcycle? Of course they can, however, can that bike compete with anything in the market? be it BMW, Honda, Harley or Aprilia. Can GM really produce and compete in the market with their new bike. It would be a first.

Sixth, loyalty. Most buike owners are very loyal to their brand. I my self, own 2 older Hondas. A 1981 CM 400C and a 1985 Shadow 700 VT. Notice the year models, old, right? Well, they both run like new, literally. Inexpensive repairs when needed, after 20 years, inexpensive maintenance, easy to keep, but most of all reliabble. I would buy a New Honda in a heartbeat, because the product is proven. However, a new GM bike would not sell well, until it's proved it's reliability, worth and quality for a few years in the bike world.

Seventh, affordability. It has to be affordable, even BMW bikes are reachable. At the rate that GM vehicles are climbing in price, $30k bike no one will buy.

I my self love the idea of GM, Chrysler or Ford to build and produce competition to Harley and the other US bikes, it would be awesome, however, there's alot to consider, mainly failure. Please the US biker, and you'll please the world. GM should build a few, even only as prototypes or concepts, just to prove that they can. Use their innovations. Right now, there's a huge market for an automatic motorcycle, and no one is meeting that market's demands because of cost. GM should step up, but they can't dissappoint. If you dissappoint in the bike world, your biker car buyers will also be dissappointed in your cars and step away from GM.

It's a good idea. As foer using the OCC guys, they can help out, but they specialize in Custom Choppers, not mass market production bikes.

Do it GM, build a high quality, fair priced automatic transmission bike (V-twin preferred), and there will be such a mad frenzy to get one, that you will have a consumer base, however, again, affordable.

Good Idea guys, but stop knocking on the japanese models, they make an awesome product, and I'll put up any of my two old bikes against any supped up Harley. Remember, Crhome won't get you home. RELIABILITY AND QUALITY WILL!!!

Thanks for your time,
Mo.

G.M. is in trouble. The only clear reason that I see acknowledged by the execs of the company is the cost of employee health insurance. Toyota is not in trouble. Is the reason that Toyota does not have the same employee health care costs? I don't think so.

Daniel,

Then you would be wrong. Its called $80 BILLION of OPEB. Toyota's obligation is far lower due to its recent (relatively) entry to production in the US market. Toyota has never had to downsize. Toyota has like 100 retirees in the US vs GMs 340K+ hourly retirees alone. An average hourly worker (fully loaded costs to include retirees) costs GM $75 and hour. The comparable number for Toyota is in the mid 40s.

Memorandum for: Robert Lutz

Subject: How to Save Pontiac.

Please bring back the Pontiac Catalina name and have a muscular 2+2 model.

Make it a cross over UTE or station wagon like the Magnum and place it on the Caddy SRX platform.

Get rid of the Torrent. Pontiac shouldn't have minivans; just great cars and hot rod station wagons and maybe a cross over UTE.

GTO - Make it mean. Let's get that LS2 to 6.5 Liters or 389 cu in

Redesign the headlamps to make 'em stacked ala 1960s.

Don't go all out retro; just have cues like the 66-67 nose and the 64-67 ram air intakes.

Keep it on the Monaro Platform so that I can make modifications to my '05 GTO.

VRRRROOOOOOM, VROOOOOOOOM, VROOOOOOOOOOM......!!!

Power it up. Pontiac should be performance. What in the blue ocean is Pontiac doing, still selling dressed up Ventures, Terrazas and Silhouettes.

Eliminate the Pontiac van platform, the Torrent needs to go. The Aztek should be burned, crushed, burned again, along with any Aztek memorabilia, Aztek documentation, plans, sketches, notes and the person that approved the Aztek idea should be given a pycut to contribute it to the health care cost (ha ha, um, right, healthcare cost).

Make affordable, high quality, desireable and competetive products, and your woes will lessen. your company will make money, and you will not even have to blame it on healthcare cost. It would've been more believeable for you to blame it on the war effort in the middle east and the high prices on fuel.

Pontiac should be all performance, muscle, cojones and get back to your vroooooooooooooom heritage.

No minivans or SUVs, leave those for Chevy.

Aztek, Torrent, Sunfire and Montana SV6 need to be eliminated from this brand.

GTO, Bonneville, Grand Am and G6 needt to be kept, as well as the Vibe, for your economy sedan/wagon combo. But please, more VROOOOOOM!!!!

Build Excitement once again, resurrect the Muscle Car, the racing heritage and go with it.

GM is an awesome, pioneering, high tech corporation. You have the mortgage world, locomotive, alliances with other brands, including Toyota, Subaru, Daewoo, Suzuki and others, but you were born and raised in Detroit, MI, USA. Where Pistons, Horsepower and VROOOOOOM Rule.

Good luck to you, and give me some VROOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!

El Verdugo

THANK GOODNESS FOR GM! Just a short note to say I would really like to see a 6 cylinder, short-bed, groovy-looking, narrow-bodied pickup from GM. THANKS!

Bob,
It's the design that sells.
And by looking at the latest Tahoe, I think GM is starting to "get it". If all GM cars looked this good the company probably wouldn't be having financial troubles.

I'm not sure how many people will agree to this but I believe that there is a odd correlation between vehicle's styling and the vehicle's quality. The cars's design says a lot about the quality level it will likely possess. If the company hasn't bothered to make the car look a little better visually, one can imagine how far the company went to get the rest of the car right.
The perception is that if something looks "just enough" it will probably feel or drive as if it's "just enough".
It's the good looks that radiates perception of quality. It gives people sense confidence that they're getting a quality product. Som