Why There’s No GM Comment About Chrysler
By Steve Harris
Vice President, GM Global Communications
I know from your comments that a lot of you would like to hear our side of what’s going on behind all the media reports suggesting there could be a link-up of GM and the Chrysler Division of DCX.
The announcement by Daimler-Chrysler on February 14 that “all options are on the table” regarding the future of the Chrysler Division certainly set off a firestorm of stories, studies and speculation by media, analysts and bloggers.
Commenting on hot news events and speculating about the future is the lifeblood of most blogs. In this case, GM has good reasons for declining to comment or speculate on any discussions we might be having with DCX about Chrysler.
The reason is simple: GM and other car makers frequently discuss issues of mutual interest. In most cases, these discussions don’t lead anywhere. So as a matter of policy, the company doesn’t confirm or comment publicly on these types of discussions unless and until it’s determined that disclosure is appropriate.
I love a good online discussion as much as anyone. But, as a spokesman for GM, I must do what is best for the company. And in this case, it means continuing to decline comment on this issue.
47 Comments
Leave a Reply
(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)
I would like to see Chrysler stay independant and reinvent itself like GM has successfuly started (and I have confidence will finish); but if there has to be a buyer I would prefer it be GM.
If GM were to buy Chrysler, GM must maintain the current Chrysler, Dodge and Jeep lineups since this will result in a gain of the 2 million sales that Chrysler achieved in 2006.
Most of Chryslers products are new and most that are not (300 and Grand Cherokee) are good sellers and need only a mild “freshening” of interiors and some exterior details to maintain sales. GM can make a new Pacifica from the Lambda along with a SWB Rendezvous and Chevy variant.
GM could replace the HUMMER line with Jeep one and eliminate the negative press surrounding HUMMER.
GM seems to be thinking of a way to get a “new” brand (like Scion) in the entry segment and the “old” Plymouth brand would be perfect with the Smart, Hornet, Matiz, Meriva, Combo, alongside the Montana and Rampage pickups.
The HEMI would differentiate the Challenger and Charger enough from the Camaro and G8 to maintain sales.
The Dakota would be the basis for a GMC model with the Twin-Mode hybrid system.
Dodge has the world class Caravan and GM says they are getting out of the minivan business so what better one to have? And the Town & Country is there for luxury buyers, so there is no need for a GM model.
The RAM truck has it’s own following and offers the Mega Cab and Cummins turbodiesel. The new 4500 and 5500 HD Models also differ enough from the Kodiak to sell well and GM could market them like Ford’s SuperDuty.
The healthcare, pension and capacity issues maybe easier to handle combined than seperately.
Buyer loyalty is still out there as GM learned when it dropped Oldsmobile, very few bought other GM brands and if that happened “internally” what do you think will happen to “external” Chrysler buyers? Don’t think they will run to the nearest Buick dealer.
I do not blame GM for keeping a tight lip on this whole situation. Making speculative assumptions is also inappropriate by the general media. Speculation is what most news sources thrive on unfortunately, so expect to hear more.
I’m quite sure much is at stake for Chrysler. It is obvious that the Chrysler arm of DMX has been mismanaged in the form of mangled products pieced together from the parts bins of Mercedes and Chrysler rather than focus on important market segments, hence their poor performance. Given their dramatic decline and in light of GM’s gradual recovery, of course there is going to be heightened interest from the general public and media alike.
The US auto industry is like a soap opera- something that goes through roller-coaster cycles and constant revitalization. Hopefully whatever happens to Chrysler will be positive and perhaps yet another success story for an old American industry giant.
Hopefully they will make some of the wise decisions that GM has made thus far towards reinventing themselves.
Thanks for responding. I am as curious as anyone, but it’s sort of a curiosity growing out of dread. It doesn’t sound like a very good idea to me unless it’s somehow the mother of all fire sales.
Mr. Lutz has been quoted as saying that GM’s primary purpose is not to remain number one in sales. At one level I agree with that. The primary purpose should be to make money and stay in business.
The only scary part is that surrendering the number one spot seems to imply giving up on the car (vs truck/SUV) market once and for all, and surrendering the lead in product development. I think that such would really be one more step toward oblivion.
The press has speculated that GM might buy Chrysler because of some emotional committment to market share. Don’t do that.
Steve,
I don’t think anyone in their right mind expect you to make any comments on all the speculation around this issue.
However, I hope that if GM is considering any kind of collaboration with Chrysler that it CONTINUES TO PUT ITS PRODUCTS FIRST!
GM is finally at a point were it can be proud of its brands and its products. I hope nothing happens to confuse the clear direction GM has right now!
Chrysler has always had a shaky history, despite som good products. I don’t think it would be wise for GM to aquire Chrysler seeing that company is in bad straits are there is no sign it will be coming out anytime soon.
Mr Lutz:
Why doesnt Pontiac build a G6 GTP Sports Wagon with Subaru All wheel drive Technology with a Hybrid Option.List it for around 28-30,000.Include dual exhaust both sides in back. There is a market for this type of car because it will get better milage than a SUV.I believe this would be a hot seller.Pontiac wouldnt be able to make them fast enough.
I would definitely buy one.
Need to do this before Toyota
beats you to the market.
Well I certainly hope that GM does NOT acquire Chrysler.
The last thing America needs is yet another good mark taken under the GM wing, to end up being yet another defused name of a “too huge” corporation.
How many rebadged, slightly reskinned cars do we need that are all but identical save for unsightly body cladding?
I like GM, but honestly, this would be nothing but turning Chrysler into another Oldsmobile, to be destroyed by GM’s refusal (or inability) to allow each “mark” the chance to be unique, creative and allow for each brands independance own identity…
And no, Punching some holes into the quarter panels of Buicks doesn’t make it any different than the other virtually identical vehicles frm the General.
I hope I’m not the only one who hopes to see a “LEVERAGING OF NORTH AMERICAN RESORCES”.
GM could leaverage component part maufacturing “in providing for nine divisions cutting cost and improving quality all the way to become North America’s BEST, biggest; component supplier; eventually suppling Toyota, Honda, Nissan, Huyndi.
I see this as an opportunity for GM/UAW/CAW to TAKE BACK North American automobile production, and continue to provide for good Union Jobs in North America.
GM- please don’t buy chrysler….they are the only (formerly) american car company with balls to design and build cool vehicles.
I can’t stand to see a dodge ram badged silverado titan knock off.
Steve,
I think gm should buy Chrysler. Chrysler has been American and should stay that way. Car companies should be Global but run locally. Chrysler could be a great compliment to GM and you can never have too much talent joining together. Good Luck
The dollar should continue to go down against most major currencies. That should be a hugh advantage for any US based auto manufacturer.
Toyota knows that and has been racing to develop North American manufacturing capabilities.
GM cannot let any other manufacturer have that future advantage.
The China manufacturers will be knocking on our door soon. We can’t let them have the keys to Chrysler & the dealer network on their own. Let GM control their entry in the future.
Well as one astute employee commented:
“If these guys have time to ‘war game’ a Chrysler acquisition, they’ve either got too many executives or they’re not working hard enough on fixing GM”
I really don’t understand why media and unions partially behave like a bunch of chicken, which got assaulted by a fox. There’s absolutely nothing unusual, regardless the branch, when competitors meet to talk about joint ventures, getting equity and other subjects of common interest. My brother is a senior engineer with Siemens and he also told me about corresponding things. Do you remember all that hype at media about a possible Siemens-Nokia-merger regarding the network-departments? And what happened so far? Nothing. All this speculation is only important to the newspapers in order to increase their figures. Mr. Wagoner and Mr. Henderson for sure are not naively making deals on Chrysler, regardless the consequences.
Be careful, GM, be very careful. The only reason to proceed on this is if DCX gives Chrysler away, I mean literally–no cash. They are something like 9 billion in debt and GM does not need debt, it needs cash. The minivans are the only products that GM is weak on (Hummer is growing, Jeep is not), and it appears that in 2007, three primary minivan lines are all the market will ever need (Honda, Toyota, Chrysler). GM is just starting to gain real traction in the market again, and should not threaten that momentum. However, if the price is a steal, and the slashing that will occur will not upset the cash flow, the UAW, and the momentum of GM worldwide, it could be a way to expand market share in North America in an inexpensive way, but it seems to me the smarter approach is to have someone else buy Chrysler, and for GM to pick up share slowly as Chrysler sheds it.
Gereon:
On the other hand, look at the story today about TUX, an electric utility in Texas, being bought out by some leveraged buyout guys for $32 BILLION! It can happen. The hot rumor is that Dow Chemical will be sold for $45 BILLION!
My feeling is that, if GM has the resources to consider buying Chrysler for several billion dollars, it should spend the money on advanced product development instead, and let Daimler Chrysler twist in the wind.
If the leveraged buyout guys want it, good for them. Many believe that the financials are clearly not there to take their interest.
I hope you’re just talking about strategic partnerships or something, because a Chrysler takeover would be an exercise in futility.
Whcih Chrysler products could you really expect to integrate into the GM lineup?
Small cars: The Caliber, Compass, and Patriot are absolutely terrible and already compete with the Vibe, and to some extent, the HHR and Vue. The PT Cruiser is in its 7th season and based on a platform that is largely out of production now. Not to mention that it’s the HHR’s most direct rival. The best you could do with these cars is slough them off to rental fleets until they’re past their sell-by dates, keeping your models retail-only.
Midsize cars: The new Sebring is quite possibly the ugliest car on the market, and if the reviews have any merit to them, they’re poorly-executed. Not to mention that the Sebring convertible now directly competes with your hardtop convertible G6. The Avenger doesn’t look to be any better, at all, and certainly no better than your older Epsilon models.
Large cars: The 300, Charger, and Magnum, while reasonably popular, have enough old Benz technology and would be completely redundant with your new high-cost Zeta program coming to fruition. And given that, none of those cars sells well enough to keep around.
Sports cars: The upcoming Challenger model would compete directly in a niche market with your much-lauded Camaro. And the Viper is a less practical, more expensive, and less saleable Corvette Z06 competitor.
Vans: This, and one other area are the only two you could salvage from Chrysler. And $13 billion or whatever is a lot to pay for them. The Sprinter, as a Benz/Freightliner model in total, would be unnecessary, too.
SUVs: The Wrangler, you could keep. The Liberty, too. And since the GMT360s are rumored to be going away, the Grand Cherokee and Commander could stay, too. If you gave them the 4.2L six, they’d be coming full-circle from the AMC days. The Jeep brand is the other item you could save from Chrysler’s wreckage, since it’s got a brand identity all its own, fairly loyal customers, if DCX doesn’t alienate them all with the FWD Compass and Patriot, and could fit in perfectly with your Hummer brand, which would, oddly enough, be another case of AMC Redux.
The Nitro, given the existence of the Liberty, would be redundant. The Durango/Aspen would compete too closely with your Tahoe and Yukon/Denali. And the Pacifica crossover is aging, selling poorly and would compete with your homerun Lambda models directly.
The trucks: The Dakota sells poorly, it’s too big, and it’s probably the one vehicle besides the Ranger/B-Series that people would be justified in choosing your Colorado/Canyon over. The Ram is now the oldest full-size truck on the market, and it’s probably the least refined, as well. With Toyota and Nissan in the fray, you guys don’t need the competition. But you could benefit by keeping some of the engineering team, to collaborate on better midsize pickups.
In total, 11 figures is way too much to pay for a company from which you could only take a couple of minivans and the Jeep brand successfully. And because of that, just think of all the bad PR you’d rack up when you have to fire even more American workers and shutter more plants. Not cool.
And Chrysler-Ford merger would be a much better fit for both companies.
So unless you’re in talks just to ensure that the balance of your hybrid technology partnership with Chrysler and BMW is protected, I would think that you guys are wasting your time.
Please don’t waste more precious product development money and time on acquiring another failing company.
I am a friend of the U.S. auto industry. I think we need a strong viable big three. I opposed the Daimler Chrysler merger in 1998 and have been proved right. I think a GM chrysler merger would cause GM to take on too many legacy costs, cause dealership conflicts and result in the elimination of more brands and factories. If GM wants more brands then it shouyld bring back Oldsmobile which it just eliminated a few years ago.
Daimler should do an ipo of about 50-75% of Chrysler to the public so that it can be an independant company again. Cooperation between the big three can be a good thing. Mergers dont work and result in the destruction of brands and marketshare. GM is doing a lot of good things these days. Things I have called for and wish to see. I was very happy to read in Motor Trend that a 2dr CTS is under development. I applaud the return to rear wheel drive on the future Impala as well as future Pontiacs and Buicks. GM is on the right track developing cars I think the public will want. A Chrysler merger may distract GM from the business at hand, bu8ilding better cars. Cooperation yes meger no.
As a GM shareholder I worry about negative volatility. If the stock goes down will Kerkorian become involved again? Does GM want Daimler to own 20% of it. If Daimler doesnt want to own Chrysler why would they want to own 20% of a combined GM Chrysler? Maybe Kerkorian and Daimler would team up to takeover the combined GM Chrysler and then sell the whole thing off to China. If there is a merger what happens to Buick. Sometimes bad ideas aquire a momentum of their own and happen just because of momentum. The ill concieved Daimler Chrysler merger of 1998 is a case in point. Chrysler should be an independant entity perhaps with a minority stake owned by Daimler that cooperates with GM in a mutually beneficial relationship. When Chrysler makes a comeback Daimler can sell off the rest to the public. Chrysler has gone on many up and down rollercoaster rides and it always came back. Of all the big three it has kept the most of its marketshare.
Nothing against GM, I think it is going to make a great comeback, but I do not think the combined entity would retain its combined market share. If anything more American marketshare will be lost to Asia. I think a Chinese takeover of Chrysler would be politically impossible. I think American economic nationalism is going to make a comeback to the benefit of both GM and Chrysler. I think the contract talks of September will result in a Goodyear type spinoff of healthcare liabilities. GM has good stuff in the pipeline this time, if things are well executued I think GM can get back marketshare, especially if the UAW cooperates. Too many distractions could derail things.
Hi Noel,
of course I am also of the opinion that GM should mainly be focused on its turnaround-efforts. The latest news which I found regarding this GM/Chrysler-Issue is telling about the possibility that these guys from Stuttgart might acquire a minority stake in GM in exchange for the potential takeover of Chrysler. See: http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/business/20070226-0638-germany-daimlerchrysler.html
Well, that’s all speculation, either, and it’s too early to say anything about this. I think the most important thing for any company (or private equity) with a possible interest in Chrysler would be an improvement of its current product-lineup. Let’s see laid-back what’s going on.
Just what GM needs now that the turnaround is underway: another couple of brands.
While there is no doubt that there are some very good gems within Chrysler, GM has enough on its hands without this distraction. GM should keep its eye on the target – Product. We are just begining to see what GM can do when it had Product as its focus.
I am fearful that GM will do something stupid – like buy Chrysler – just to remain the # 1 automaker. This would be short term ‘gain’ but long term pain. GM is just getting its act together without this to occupy it’s thoughts.
Rick, Noel and of course Gereon – comments are welcome.
Cheers,
Chris (Toronto)
Just read that you will use the Camaro’s platform for Cadillacs as well. You are working BACKWARDS.
The story needs to read that Camaros are based off of Cadillac platforms! How is anyone gonna respect Cadillac now?? Bob Lutz and Rick Wagoner are the only executives in the industry that would allow this to happen. Ya gotta do better than that, guys. People bought Cadillacs because they were excited about Sigma as a dedicated line for Cadillac, and would have loved to see other cars on decontented versions of the same. NOT THE OTHER WAY AROUND.
JUST WHEN IT LOOKS LIKE YOU KNOW WHAT YOU’RE DOING IN THE TURNAROUND, YOU THROW IN REASONABLE DOUBT!!!!
Bob Lutz fixed Chrysler before and he can do it again.
The year Bob Lutz left Chrysler, Chrysler was the most profitable automaker on the face of the earth. It had a product portfolio second to none. And Chrysler had a cash hoard that amounted to some $15 billion. In fact, the entire automobile industry was healthy at the time with an accumulated cash hoard of $70 billion by the Big Three.
Chrysler’s downfall began the moment Lutz was passed up for the top job. An outsider was brought in and the company lost its rhythm and focus. When the company “merged” 30-50% of the white collar staff jumped ship including Lutz and the company has been spiraling out of control since.
GM does not need Chrysler as much as Chrysler needs Lutz. They have the capital invested, but they lost the investment edge.
I said it before I will say it again. I believe GM should have a 40% market share in the USA how they get it is up to them.
I dunno if buying Chrysler would be such a good thing. GM has been doing a pretty good job at getting back on its feet and having the burdon of saving a failing car company might not be such a smart idea. Don’t get me wrong the technology that Chrysler can bring to the plate would be invaluable to GM it just seems like this opportunity has come at the wrong time thats all. But life is about chances and this may be a chance that would be in the best interest for GM. If the deal does go through PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, PLEASE, REVIVE AMC and PLYMOUTH!!!!Chrysler killed AMC after they bought them out just for the Jeep name. I would love to see a modern AMX cruising the streets. Not to mention since they’re already doing the Challenger the Cuda would be a perfect runningmate along with a new Roadrunner. Think of the possibilities, not only being able to ressurect these legendary models but you’ll also gain licensing rights to Chrysler restoration parts which in term = more $$$
Tough call which way to go but in the final end I myself would like to see GM show itself as a strong supporter of our country and make a deal to protect the few American nameplates left.
I’d rather see GM buy the Dodge side of DCX if anything to prevent other countries like Russia, China, etc get a free ride on buying in cheaply, gaining all those dealerships and in the end would undermind GM’s own product line.
I would not like to see DCX end up with a stake in GM and over time really did the deal to only take over GM.
I think this challenge of GM making a deal would infact make GM work harder and be a better success in doing so.
GM has already killed off American nameplates that were part of American car history and be nice GM trying to preserve our pride and history in nameplates like Dodge.
Steve, just let Chrysler build some minivans for us rebadged as Chevys and Buicks, and we’ll let them sell some Tahoes and Suburbans under the Chrysler & Dodge nameplates. Then we’ll get to plug a gaping hole in our product lineup and amortize the tooling on the GMT900’s more quickly, while Chrysler gets a much better SUV product and can shut down production of the Durango/Aspen. Win-win.
steve do you remember packard joining studebaker joining nash joining rambler joining hudson joining american motors joining jeep joining chrysler this may not be chronilogically correct but do you want to be next to the party (wake) tony
ps don’t go there please!!!
Steve:
Thanks for the forum for discussion on this topic. I for one think that a purchase of Chrysler in and of itself may be damaging to GM in the long run. I believe the German side of the company, tech. wise, wanted nothing to do with Chrysler, giving them “table scraps” from the Mercedes side, instead of working together, sharing technology, and allowing both sides to flourish. This has caused Chrysler to begin to “die on the vine” so to speak. I think any talks of a purchase should be for DCX as a whole. And let them know; WE are buying YOU! WE call the shots!
I have noticed lately that locally, many dealerships have been offering more GM brands under one roof. This has led me to believe that a purchase of DCX may work. From a sales perspective you could market all brands in 3 groups. Have your dealerships choose what group they would like to sell: economy (Chevy, Dodge, Saturn) Sporty/Intermediate (Pontiac, Jeep,GMC,Hummer) and luxury (Buick, Chrysler, SAAB, Mercedes, and Cadillac). This would allow people to cross shop at the same dealership.
GM is fine as it is. Yes there are strategic reasons that GM might be interested in Chrysler, but in the long run, GM has to focus on what divisions it has now.
And GM can flourish with the right R&D and high quality.
Great job on Autoline Detroit last week. It was very revealing into how you guys handle major stories like this one with DCX. This blog is a great way to level the playing field by getting your own message out.
No comments on any of these posts today? Gee whiz guys, we’ve got to raise our game. These are existential issues!
No news Bob? Any thoughts about the Phoenix, which was the subject of an extensive article in the LA Times yesterday?
Don’t make the mistake of buying Chrysler. You’d only get more trouble to manage and maybe worse trouble than it was to put GM back on the track.
There’s nothing in Chrysler that GM doesn’t already got. RWD platforms? Sigma, Zeta and Kappa are the answers. Hybrid powertrains? Didn’t you co-developed a two-mode with them and now are researching by your own the gas-eletric of the Volt? Jeep? OK, it’s a strong nameplate, but Hummer can be as strong as. The Chrysler brand? What does Buick serve for? Dodge? Don’t you have a ressurecting Pontiac that has a strong seller called G6? Hemi? Well, a base 6.0 LS2 is only 25 hp behind of a 6.1 Hemi used in the SRT8 ones.
Hey, you don’t need to fight a war that’s not yours. All you have is to improve GM every time using you own resources. Remember what happened when you bought stakes in Fiat and Subaru…
Chris (Toronto):
Right!
No sooner do I ask where the comments are than there comes a flood of brilliant ones. I guess they got bottled up in edit!
Sorry to be impatient. I should hae known. One more time – you guys are awesome!
Chrysler is a dead company and GM would be silly to purchase it now.
Jeep is an also ran sure to be dead shortly now that the SUV fad is over. Their only product worth saving is the Wrangler as the remainder of the SUVs are created for city streets.
Dodge – Ram very outdated with declining market share. Durango is a joke, Nitro is a flop. Charger neat idea but not selling so well. Only good product is the minivan which looks 10 years old.
Chrysler – 300C is the crown jewel. Sebring is yawn, and Aspen is embarassing.
GM has a stable of great, long lasting products. Buying Chrysler won’t do anything but bring down GM’s image as Chrysler has the worst resale values of any domestic automaker.
I could see some self interest in this Chrysler thing. I think Gm would be insane to buy them, but if they did what they could to prevent Chrysler from winding up being owned by someone outside of North America, that wold still be in GM’s interests. GM and Chrysler could form a partnership and share engineering expertise and expense on a number of models:
Chrysler is really good at Minivans. GM never was good at them. GM is good at big SUV’s which is a weak point at Chrysler. Perhaps a new venture on a small car platform as both companies are a bit weak there, but a combined effort may give some very good results for both companies. This can work, as long as GM doesn’t actually own Chrysler.
Don’t assume a Chinese or other buyer will just waltz in here and assume Chrysler’s current market share. Yes they have 9000+ instant dealerships, but these are the same ornerous dealers DCX has had to deal with. Not easy. GM’s best move is to let someone else take over the dealers, the inventory and health care headaches, and grab the customers who fall away from Chrysler.
A full out merger makes no sense. Even sharing the GMT900 in my mind would be insane. GM is doing a lot right, why change course now? Although if they were to merge I can see some cost savings. Example, the GMT900 would serve dodge well. The hummer and jeep brands combine well and the new RWD platform for chevy could work for chrysler and the new 300. I think a merger is only being discussed because GM is really worried about losing number one to toyota, if toyota didn’t exist we wouldn’t be talking merger.
GM buying Chrysler, or at least the trademarks and technology, would be pretty sweet.
On the other hand, the rumored DaimlerChrysler investment in GM, would not be good at all.
Seriously, Australian Pontiacs are one thing, but a DaimlerChrysler ownership stake in General Motors would pretty much destroy the loyalty that is a hallmark of domestic car buyers.
Seriously, it’s not just the lack of a stick shift that’s keeping the Mopar-heads from buying lots of Chargers and 300s.
Those of us that want foreign cars buy them. Those of us that dream of buying a Great American Car want it to be as great and as American as possible.
Chrysler already IS a foreign company, but somehow people forgive German ownership. But a lot of people would NOT forgive Japanese or Chinese ownership (not really fair, but true), and not shop there. And in looking for an “American” auto company, former Chrysler buyers would flock to the only two left, GM and Ford.
Hi Steve -
Thanks for your post. Truthfully, like other posters, I do not see the synergies from a merger b/t Chrysler and GM. Daimler-Chrysler should have been able to consummate a better synergy, to which it was too late.
On to another topic, if I may. I just saw the February numbers for GM – good job, esp as fleet sales dropped.
It is the fleet sales issue I would like to bring up. I agree with your limitations on selling to rental fleets so as to keep residuals high for the retail cars. Very wise. And I understood the past concept of GM and Ford selling older models only to fleet customers, like the Chevy ‘Classic’ Malibu and the Taurus. But I have another idea.
Why does GM design a mid-size car for only fleet buyers? Many times the only time you can get a Camry or Accord driver at home in the seat of a GM is when they have to rent a car for business and travel. When GM sells to fleet an older model that has a weaker engine, plastic interior, and rat fur seats, its hard to get them to move back to GM at home. So why not design a car that would not dilute brand value/residuals, but would still entice a renter to consider a GM product for home? I bet you can add a new design based off the 2008 Malibu within a year, and have it out there for the fleet buyers. Call it a “GM Cutlass” if you dont want to use Chevy or Buick or Pontiac. But use the car as an advertisement. Put a promotional DVD in there with GM’s new cars, and make a contest with the serial numbers of the rentals (rent a GM Cutlass at Hertz and qualify to win a Solstice or Malibu).
I think GM loyalists are feeling that a comeback by the General is happening. But you have to share that excitement with the general public. Rentals are a way to do it.
Not only a dedicated rental car,but a dedicated Taxi platform as well, Like Ford’s Escape Hybred, Maybee with classic Checker Cab styling but with deisel power hybred drive or both. Chevy Caprice’s dominated Livery in this country untill they were cancelled; and they represented GM as proveyer of reliable workhorse vehicals. Also why not a Hybred 6 passenger Limo, Ecotec FWD 6sp auto, rear wheel electric drive (for all weather convienience) and cosmetic facelift on the DTS; call it Fleetwood series 75, LEFT WING LUXURY…BY CADILLAC! Just in case a Democrat gets elected president in 08, It would show GM to be a world class automaker, and the United States to be still part of the First World so to speak.
Jason Zebersky
“Well, i think Gm should continued to stay on the course of build its company,if anything i see them doing with chrysler , from what ive heard is helping Chrysler with there truck platform, and small car platform,
For all us Buick loyalists: I just read in the new Motor Trend that the Velite is on again for 2010. Combine that with the Enclave, Lucerne and hopefully a redesigned Laccrosse that is a nice lineup. Hope it happens.
It would be beyond madness for GM to buy Chrysler. If anything, the actions of Daimler-Benz should serve as a warning to Americans obsessed with buying Japanese cars. Just because their companies build models in the US, it doesn’t mean that they’re now All-American with the consequent loyalty and a sense of social responsibility. They’re not, and time and circumstance will eventually prove this.
David Russell, 3/6, 6:58 PM:
Amen!
Eric P. has some excellent ideas — especially the promotional DVD in rental cars. Yes, indeed…make those fleet sales a huge advertisement with an awesome car as the — no pun intended — vehicle.
By the way, a full-on purchase of Chrysler would be a defensive move for the very notion that domestics can build great cars that last. GM’s quality is hands-down the best of the domestics, but much of the buying public clings to the idea that GM makes cars that fall apart. Why? Because other domestics’ products have historically fueled those perceptions.
And therein lies the opportunity:
Why not buy Chrysler, adopting it as the newest member of the GM family, and make its cars and trucks reliable? This makes GM able to turn around in a few years and say, “See how much better Chrysler is now? It’s because of GM’s commitment to quality.”
The defense in here goes deeper. The last thing GM wants is for Toyota or Honda, or some other Asian-based brand, to go in there, buy Chrysler, and make that same statement in a few years.
This is a prime opportunity to bury the hatchet, once and for all, on faulty buyer perceptions regarding domestic quality. And if the opportunity is not taken, an exacerbation of that perception will, I fear, ruin, once and for all, the domestic auto manufacturing industry.
I would LOVE to see GM bring Chrysler back to American ownership. But if you do, DO NOT . . . DO NOT . . . GM-ify them! Maintain their identity and differences and only re-ignite their fires that the Germans have sort-of failed to feed. The opposite strengths of the two companies would benefit them both. Chrysler has a flair for giving the public what we want, bringing concepts to the streets before people forget them & without Borifying them first, and implementing fresh innovative ideas. They were the ONLY American auto manufacturer that possessed these qualities in a consistent way. GM could learn something from THEM in those areas. GM’s strength is with safety features & innovative cutting-edge mechanical concepts that they unfortunately either never bring to market or wait for others to copy and beat them to market thereby knocking all the wind out of their own sails.
GM should focus even more on their cutting-edge industry-leading Research & Development (Hydrogen, the VOLT!, the amazing innovations developed for the Corvette, etc.), end the reputation-killing dichotomy between mechanical JUNK and SPECTACULAR mechanical quality at GM by just DUMPING THE JUNK and extending all the BEST engines, etc. to ALL MODELS!, and adopt Chrysler’s rare (in America) ability to produce innovative style, concepts, and at least the perception/look/feel/& finish of quality outside the drivetrain (GM’s weakest point).