Bob Lutz Addresses PR Professionals in Detroit
Yesterday, GM Vice Chairman Bob Lutz spoke Monday during the Public Relations Society of America’s International Conference in Detroit. While Bob’s remarks have more to do with public relations and effective messaging than with General Motors, he does make some interesting points about communications and how it relate to the auto industry. - Will Stewart, blog editor
- Posted in Bob Lutz
HotCarNut
While it’s great that Bob feels like posting on FastLane has become second nature, is there any way we can get nature to call more frequently?!?! There is so much to discuss, and not even about the merger! I’d love to hear Bob communicate to us on:
1. The thought process behind delaying the Cruze for production in the US until 2010.
2. The next generation of mid-size sedans launched with the Opel Insignia and including the next Saturn Aura, Buick LaCrosse, and Chevrolet Malibu.
3. GM’s continuing efforts in returning to the roots of it’s brands and the challenges faced in today’s marketplace.
4. GM’s decision to cancel the next generation of large SUVs (currently on GMT900) and the potential move of some of them to Lambda.
5. The early success of the Camaro customer ordering, and the problems encountered in handling an unruly dealer network (price gouging, refusing to place orders as dealers only have a limited number of vehicles, etc).
Gerard
I share HotCarNut’s grievance–and the wonderful articulation. The FastLane is simply too slow. With so many events involving GM happening so quickly, it’s time for the General’s team to be more active. No one really cares about the Corvette’s green honors. I’m sorry.
Eugene A
There is one PR topic I would like to ask Bob about: how do you plan to deal with the fact that VW’s market cap now makes it the largest company in the world. They also have to deal with the labor unions.
HotCarNut
Eugene A
That’s only temporary and was due to the run-up caused by Porsche’s announcement that it was going to acquire substantially all of Volkswagon in the next 6 weeks. VW shares have fallen back in today’s trading.
Besides: as a finance guy I can tell you that today’s market caps (either good or bad) aren’t realistically reflecting the underlying financial performance of their companies. The market needs a serious dose of prozac because business fundamentals have been forgotten and trading is purely psychological at this point. Good news (or even the hint of it) sees 890 point surges, and bad news (or even the hint of it) causes companies’ market share to take hits of 15-30% in a single day. The market has become disconnected with business reality and you’d have a better shot playing the slots in Vegas than getting an honest valuation of a company in today’s market.
Gary Dikkers
Lutz said: “Now, as Charles de Gaulle used to say to the press, “Ladies and gentlemen, I am now ready for your questions to my answers.”
Mr. Lutz,
You didn’t ask the question, but here’s my answer:
People have been wondering what possible reason there could be for a GM/Chrysler merger. On the surface it doesn’t make sense for two struggling companies to join and somehow expect to become stronger. For example: Who would benefit if the new Camaro competes with a Challenger built by the same company?
But I believe I’ve figured it out ~ It’s so GM can gain the rights to the “Hemi” trademark. I imagine it won’t be long until we hear about the CTS Hemi, the Enclave Hemi, even a Camaro Hemi.
By the way, I just heard that the US Government will likely be buying preferred stock in the new post-merger GM. If true, won’t that make all US citizens shareholders and GM partners? When do I get my key to the executive bathroom in the Ren Cen?
V/R
Gary Dikkers
Rick Rohde
I liked those alpha caddy’s on Motor Trend except for the coupe, a 2dr version of the sedan would be perfect. I hope an alpha Chevy is still coming. I still think you screwed up not bring the Zeta Chevy that is sold elsewhere. If only all your loyal Chevy fans knew about the Zeta Chevy’s sold overseas. If I could, I’d order one of those Brazilian Chevy Omegas, and send a Colorado( isn’t it about time to bury the S-10?)
SteveG
Good PR?
This from a company that continues to change the names of their vehicles willy nilly?
The Cobalt SS is getting very good reviews, too bad you’re changing the name to Cruze (ugh).
Show us GM has a clue and please ditch the name Cruze! Its bloody awful.
Names that mean nothing get a nother lease on life like the LaCrosse (should be changed to Regal) and the Aveo (should be changed to Metro). Lucerne? Should be the Park Avenue.
The Cobalt actually sells-why the heck are you changing its name!?
As for the Chrysler merger it seems like a really bad idea but I won’t mind much if you give Dodge a version of the Cruze (ugh) and call it the Dodge Dart!
You guys had better not kill off the Dodge brand, thats all I can say.
Alex
Ahhh killing off the Tahoe, Suburban, and Silverado… NO GM, I will not buy another GM car if they do that. I like how it is now. If I want an Acadia or a Tahoe I have the choice, but if you take an Acadia and call it a Tahoe, you guys are stupid. I don’t care if you replace the engines with fuel cells, that’s great. But I always want a truck! As do many other people.
Phil
Add my “no” vote to killing the Silverado/Sierra 2500. I’m ready to buy one NOW, but the 6.2 liter is only available in the 1500 series. None of the dealers I’ve talked to have a solution to this dilemma or can explain GM’s logic, so I’ll just wait and see what happens for 2010. Why on earth would you offer a more powerful engine only in a light-duty truck?
Hawkshaw
SteveG. ~ “Names that mean nothing get a nother lease on life like the LaCrosse”
Don’t say the name “La Crosse” means nothing. It’s French for “The Cross.” It does mean something, the question is why GM named a car for a religious icon.
Jim Davoust
Mr. Lutz,
I really enjoyed your speech, at least the first two pages. Early on in your speech you make a number of key points that I agree with, namely about the importance of being earnest in communications. Originally a Michigander, now living in New York, I believe honesty and forthrightness are special qualities of people from my home state. However, I have difficulty reconciling one example you presented, with another source of information I encountered recently. Several weeks ago I viewed a Climate Change program on PBS called Frontline, which highlighted the fact the the Chevy Volt isn’t yet ready, and is likely not to be ready for 2010. Frontline briefly showed a vehicle demo that didn’t come off quite right. Yes, these things do happen. Yet, in your speech to the PR conference, you indicated that the Volt is on much the same path as the Dodge Viper was in the 1980’s. And it was implied that since the Viper was successful, the Volt will also be successful. What will you do, this week, to redouble your efforts to make absolutely sure that the Volt will be successful?
Geofcol
I have always felt that GM needed to stress in their advertising how much the cost of a car goes to support the present and former GM employees. Who among us doesn’t have a relative or know a friend who worked for GM. GM has made commitment a to their employees past and present to give them the best benefits.
nicholas Von Staden
GM is just like the newspaper industry…you just don’t get it…first the rest of
america sees you as elite…with all your bennys for retirees and inflated production costs…
And if this bailout goes through….which I doubt very much…you still haven’t address the root problems…labor… bad contracts, to many models and a bloated dealer network…bankrupcy is the only way to start off clean.
ScottC
Dear Mr. Lutz,
If Neil Young can make a 1959 Lincoln go 65mpg in initial tests now with a small group of engineers, why can’t GM get the Volt out? The idea behind Neil Young’s project is that we can do this to current vehicles, not spend years coming up with a vehicle to go around the core technology.
Check it out PLEASE….
http://www.lincvolt.com/
Brady Turley
Bob,
I hope you have taken into consideration the things I have said in the not so distant past. If you guys do get the government aid and have to restructure, do it right. Drop the bean counters because all they will ever do is count beans. Bring in people who are enthusiastic about the automobile industry and want to make a mark on it. This goes for more than the people who design the cars, but the people who build and the people who market them.
As you know now, the ball has been dropped on the Volt. You put white out on a white canvas and expected people to see it stand out. BRING OUT THE YELLOW HIGHLIGHTER! The original concept was something to be enthused about, the pre-production model is the inbreed offspring of the Prius.
The Camaro is something to be excited about, so where are the magical words “Muscle Car”? I don’t want to hear performance or sports car when I hear about the Camaro. It’s got a great option list (besides blue for only v6’s) and plenty of power, so use words that invoke interest.
The Silverado is a great truck and I’m glad to see the 6 speed auto for the new model year, except you left it out on the one engine that needed it the most…the 4.8. The 4.8 seems to be lost in the mix when it is a strong performer. 295 horse is more than the original 5.3, and the 4.8 offers good economy already. In my 07 I have knocked down 22 mpgs (all stock) on pure highway driving and get a 16 mpg mixed driving. So why doesn’t the 4.8 get the 6 speed? I will bolt right up, the program would be darn close to the 5.3 to make it work, and it will help fill in where the 4.8 lacks a little, and thats down low pull. There have been many a time when a gear between 3rd and 4th would have helped pulling a trailer.
The Colorado was long overdue for the V-8, but it still isn’t segment leading. The Dakota has you on towing and size, which may or may not be a bad thing, but I still find have a reduced payload with the V8 as a disgrace.
Finally, as for the website. FIX IT PLEASE! I know one of your interns got wasted one night and decided to design the absolute worst spec sheets, but there was no need to actually use it. Drop the PDF and give back the true spec sheets like you did just a few months ago.
Thats it, I’m out. Fix the above and you wont need the bean counters to make money, the company will sell itself. If you need anymore, they got my number down in Texas.
Brady S. Turley
Tim
There’s really no reason to doubt Chrysler’s near death. For which a company that was shining brightly with it’s cutting edge LH automobiles in the mid 90’s, it seemed that Chrysler had conquered the stale over use of it’s aging K cars. Unfortunately when Daimler acquired Chrysler, they’re emphasis was on big, thirsty, overpowered V8’s and rear wheel drive. All of the form, function and beauty of the former LH cars was abandoned. Being replaced with overweight chunky looking designs (Chrysler 300 and Dodge Charger) with rear wheel drive. That’s not progress. What was OK 40 years ago is certainly not in favor today. Chrysler needs to chuck their warm and fuzzy recollections of those “fabulous” hemi’s of eons ago and focus on efficient power plants and designs that MOST people really want. The 2009 Dodge Challenger is just one more stupid move to further impact Chrysler’s inability to offer an automobile with mass appeal. Chrysler should have put that money into developing a modern, good looking, light weight automobile that’s capable of achieving 40MPG. Instead they let nostalgia get in the way of things and develop the silly looking Challenger. Don’t scratch your heads and wonder why Chrysler is knocking on deaths door. If Chrysler can some how get their act together and have a vision thats forward thinking then maybe, just maybe, they might make it after all.
Karl Friedrich Unverzagt
“While Bob’s remarks have more to do with public relations and effective messaging than with General Motors…”
Let’s hope that one salient point Bob made to the PR pros is not to get caught saying, “Global warming is a crock of #%$*.”