GM Total Confidence — Rally On!
By Mark LaNeve
GMNA Vice President of Vehicle Sales, Service and Marketing
Look, we know it isn’t easy out there right now. We are all struggling to get back on track and regain our confidence, basically America needs a rally. We’ve been down before and rallied back strong – just like we did with “Keep America Rolling.”
So, in that spirit, today we’re helping our customers rally back by launching “GM Total Confidence.”
Basically, America’s best coverage just got better, with two new features to help protect your paycheck and vehicle investment.
First, with our new Automatic Payment Protection, you no longer need to worry about losing your car if you lose your job. GM Total Confidence will cover your car payment for up to nine months on new vehicle loans or leases – up to $500 per month – if you lose your job involuntarily in the first 24 months of ownership. Plus, we all know it’s a lot easier to find – and keep – a job when you have wheels.
Second, GM Total Confidence protects your investment with Vehicle Value Protection, which offers up to $5,000 in assistance in the unlikely event customers might be “upside down” on their trade-in within the first six years of purchase. Vehicle Value Protection covers the difference between what you owe on your loan and the NADA Retail value of your used vehicle, up to five grand. It’s that easy.
Of course, we’ll continue to protect your vehicle with our fully-transferable five-year 100,000-mile limited powertrain warranty. And, we protect your family with our complimentary one-year subscription to the OnStar ‘Safety and Security’ Package.
It’s GM Total Confidence with a rally attitude.
The program covers all new vehicle loans and leases from Chevrolet, Cadillac, Buick, Pontiac, Saturn, HUMMER and GMC. (Note: GM Total Confidence does not include Saab, which is covered under a different warranty.)
For more information, go here. And you can see a TV ad for GM Total Confidence here.
As we continue to reinvent GM, we’re taking a fresh look at everything we do. We’re intent on providing superior value, quality, fuel economy … and, most importantly, earning your trust. And, if we can help rebuild a little confidence along the way, all the better. So link up arms … put your ball cap on inside out … and join the rally, with GM Total Confidence. It’s about time we all took a big step forward.
86 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.)
Now you just have to start making great cars that look great as well. I know you are improving quality but there is that subtle thing about design the makes certain European and Asian cars more desirable.
I was looking at the design for the new Model S from Tesla and thought – this is what the Volt could have looked like – except a little smaller. The volt looks so laden and encrusted with this protrusion and that bling. It is like a fastback version of a cheaper Malibu or something. I am sure you have talented designers at GM but you never follow through with modern clean designs. This is the key to your turnaround GM!
I purchased a new Tahoe in September 2008, do I qualify for the program
Too bad the payment protection plan doesn’t apply to GM Employees…. what is that saying? Guess I won’t be buying that new Camaro this year!
This program will do a great job of getting people back into the showrooms. I think the dealer network needs a re-education on customer service and customer satisfaction. Let’s face it, for 95% of the car buying population, the only contact with GM as a company, is the dealer, unlike the empolyees ,that know the company from the “inside out”. It would certainly be to a dealer’s advantage to go the extra mile to ensure their walk in customers are treated with courtesy and dignity, to enhance the vehicle buying experience. With each and every vehicle being so important, especially in these tough times, dealers need to know that only exemplary customer service can set them apart from each and every other GM dealer, after all any Chevrolet dealer can get you a white Malibu, but only the dealer that puts focus on customer service can keep that white Malibu customer returning to their showroom, time after time.
… put your ball cap on inside out …
What is this about? Why would I want to put my ball cap on inside out? Forget this rah-rah, rally stuff and just build better cars.
Actually, your business model is rather simple — just build cars that people will pay more for than it costs you to build them.
America is trying to support you GM, hence the over $30 billion we are going to invest in you. You know what needs to be done and have been putting it off. Hasn’t Hummer been under strategic review for almost two years, and the corporations is now saying that a decision about the brands future wont come until the next few weeks. How much time do you need to decide when to cut a brand that is bleeding money and sales. as a niche brand it is costing GM more to have it than the benefits the brand provides. Fritz as a finance guy, you have to know the math here doesnt make sense. Further you should know the credit markets are so dry that dealers can not even get floor plan loans to remain purchasing inventory and stay in business. do we really think any logical company is even remotely interested in either Saab or Hummer or Saturn. Of course not because they would have been sold already.
Foreign automakers wouldnt even buy these brands to use for distributing their own cars here in the U.S. because the worldwide automarket is experiencing a major correction right now and no company would really waste the money or has the resources to expand their footprint in such a way.
When you have brands that command 1% or less of a market in which you operate the choice is easy. Of course some buyouts for workers and factory closures must occur, your marketshare is shrinking due to shrinking global automotive demand.
The decisions to close brands has been far too slow and is what is holding the company back in a big way. years have passed and still the loss-makers of Saab-Hummer-Saturn remain in your brand portfolio. these niche brands are taking the focus off your important car brands and even making your euro-operations suffer.
We need a CEO for this corporation who knows what needs to be done to move forward and will make the tough choices immediately so this company can stay alive. clinging to the past in a hope to retain your 12 brand portfolio wont work, especially because washington lawmakers are calling the shots for the company.
Hopefully a top-level manager reads these blogs. Fritz and any other executive, please make the decision to discontinue Hummer,Saab,Saturn by 2011 at the latest. these three brands are severely destracting the company and not allowing for a swift restructuring. the elimination of producing all of these unprofitable automotives for niche dealers, frees up investment in core brands. If GM wants to survive tough decisions about brands must be made.
GM product has improved, and some costs have been cut but it is painfully obvious more is needed.
GM should also look for a partner in its struggling Opel/Vauxhall unit. this unit is attractive to investment because it commands nearly 10% of the european automotive market. by having a partner with a fresh perspective, GM could move faster on restructuring of that unit, while recieving some outside help and ideas, most likely from another auto-maker. if an alliance were formed there could be more globalization of product and sharing of platforms with the introduction of new vehicles to the european market.
I am sure lawmakers will want GM to do something with the Pontiac-Buick-GMC brand, but the actual plan of action remains to be seen. If pontiac can be relegated to a sport niche, Buick sell a new and refreshed Opel line up here in America, GM will drastically cut their structural costs by being able to leverage their assets, use their global platforms, and consolidate their large and inefficient structure.
It was interesting because a frequent GM blogger noted that GM could actually consolidate their 3 channel BPG dealers into one large full line dealer for some extra efficiencies. He discussed bringing the Oldsmobile name back and making the brand a full-line behemoth that serves the sporty,luxury, and utility vehicle needs. I actually think for the most part some of those things are what the Oldsmobile brand had stood for, for a while. It isnt far off to think down the road the company would consider a move like that to reintroduce a brand that many consumers sorely miss from the American auto-market place.
I think the way forward for the company is simple, as always it comes down to the speed the company is able to cut brands,factories, labor costs, and production. there are many variables here but the company has been talking about many of these moves for a while, just not following through on them. I personally can not wait until the entire Board of Directors at GM is replaced with executives who have a different approach and view on how to successfully make GM viable again. Good luck GM.
I agree with Stan. The Tesla Model S is very exciting! I am planning on reserving one as soon as my house sells and I can afford the monthly payments when we move to a smaller house/apartment. What is taking GM so long to get the Volt out for sale!? They say there is so much research to do but they already had all of this working with the EV1 ten years ago!!!
Hurry up the cakes and sell the Volt already! In fact, you should already have at least five different Voltec based models for sale right now today – similar to Chrysler’s ENVI models. If Chrysler would sell me a Jeep EV I would buy one right now today. If GM would sell me a Volt I would buy one right now today. Hurry up for the love of America!
You need to increase the warranty to 5 years Bumper to Bumper.
What people who abandoned your cars most remember are the things non-Powertrain that failed after 3 years.
Until you increase the Warranty don’t expect people to be in any hurry to take another chance on your products.
Put your money where your mouth is. Increase the Warranty.
That’s a good start.
About OnStar, I always thought you should give it for free forever and fully transferable. That is an advantage GM has over all other automakers I believe
Advertise it to people who carry their children in their cars, you can reach almost everybody with this.
OnStar is a fantastic differentiator, use it!!!
Again about OnStar. Don’t see it as a profit center. See it as a loss-leader!!!!
Glad to hear the new CEO Fritz Henderson is leading the restructuring team. Good Luck.
I read here regularly, and I’m tired of the GM bashing.
I currently own three GM vehicles- two Corvettes and a Cadillac CTS- and all I have to say is congratulations!!!!!
I’m going to miss Bob Lutz and the many who followed his leadership in building truly great, kick-azz, no apology performance vehicles.
These are great vehicles from the standpoint of Performance, Value, and yes, Quality.
Perhaps all you hear from here are the naysayers who don’t own a GM vehicle, or the few who do have significant problems, as all brands do.
My message to at GM is this- keep your heads high. Eventually sanity will prevail in Washington, and you won’t be treated like red-headed stepchilden, (compared to the no-questions-asked approach offered to AIG and the banks).
It’s a shame that government sock-puppets are going to be making the decisions in the short run…throw Rick Wagoner out, it’s good for the politics of the situation….what’s next? Is Nancy Pelosi going to decide that my C6 Corvette is inappropriate?
I guess if the EPA can decide that what I exhale every few seconds (carbon dioxide) is a pollutant, than anything is possible. I guess that makes me a point source under the Clean Air Act.
So, hang in there, friends. You have lots of us out in the marketplace who like what you’re doing.
In the meantime, I’m gonna go take the Corvette to the track and drive it the way you intended it to be driven…..
GM is broke! You are using taxpayer funding just to keep operating. Your offer to make car payments for up to 9 months for people that purchase a GM car is absurd. You are using taxpayer money! Since you are now a government controlled company I would not even consider purchasing a car from GM. A Ford Motor Company vehicle is now the only one that I would consider. I was raised thinking that GM “Mark of Excellence” was the only company that anyone should purchase a car from. GM management has destroyed that idea. In all fairness to GM the current economy has provided nearly insurmoutable problems for you.
“First, with our new Automatic Payment Protection, you no longer need to worry about losing your car if you lose your job. GM Total Confidence will cover your car payment for up to nine months on new vehicle loans or leases – up to $500 per month”
Isn’t this just a rather awkward way of transferring money from one U.S. taxpayer to another?
If someone buys a GM car and loses their job, your plan is to cover their car payment with money you got from the Feds, who got their money from taxpayers, or printed out of thin air.
Wouldn’t a less awkward way be for the Feds to just give coupons directly to U.S. citizens that would be good only for buying cars made in the U.S.?
Don’t get me wrong, I’m a big GM fan, but disappointed that they always seem to be playing a “me too.” role in so many areas. Take today’s announcment of the Total Confidence Program. It’s no secret that the idea is borrowed from Hundyai. Why wasn’t GM the FIRST out of the box with this idea? GM seems late to the party in so many ways — fuel economy, hybrids. When people think of fuel ecnomy and hybrids, chances are, Toyota is the first that comes to mind for them. GM should be leading innovation and ideas, not playing catchup all the time. I think the company needs new young, bold thinkers. Still, I wish them the best and will probably keep buying to support America.
GM,s New offer is nice but will not reach enough people.Many of us had jojs and lost them,and some of us lost our homes,and some of us live on fixed income.So here is the problem,no one has credit,and if you get credit we would pay a higher payment that at this time no consumers could afford. If a car payment was lower many more people would by cars.GM should sell direct to the people instead of the car lots so they could give lower payments for now ,and would not have to pay for sales men commisions,bank fee,s etc. My husband and i are in this spot,and we want to buy a car but we know we can not make $300.00 + payment right now with this economy
David and Dewey,
Without selling cars nothing is going to save GM. Having the payment protection is a way to make sales, and is probably a better idea then just having rebates. In this economy people are worried about losing their job so they put off making major purchases. This is one way to get their confidence back up and sell cars.
Dewey, a coupon for a new car isn’t the same thing. Lets say the coupon is for $5000 off a vehicle. So instead of paying $25,000 for your new car, you’re now paying $20,000. 3 months from now you lose your job. You still need to keep making payments on your $20,000 loan. If you can’t, you lose your car, and then will have a tough time getting a new job. In GM’s way, you don’t have to make that payment on your $25,000 loan until you get another job (which is much easier with a car). It’s basically a bet – do you think you’re going to lose you job or not?
For once, I have to congratulate GM on this move to get people back in the showroom. While you are late to the party, having let Hyundai get the most accolades with their program, at least you have showed up at the party, and are looking pretty good.
There already seems to be a bit of fresh air coming out of GM since Sunday when Mr. Wagoner announced his and most of the BODs departure. At least GM now seems to acknowledge that more work than what was spelled out in your viability plan is required, and are getting on with it.
Now, if I could just talk you folks into putting the V-6 you have in the new Camaro, with the six speed manual into the new 2010 Buick Lacrosse…………………………………………………………………………….
A bankruptcy, even pre-packaged (which I think is unrealistic), will kill the confidence of every stakeholder. It is nice that the government says they’ll guarantee warranties should GM go into bankruptcy. But in making a household’s 2nd-most expensive purchase, people are concerned about RESALE. I’d love to support GM but until the threat of bankruptcy ends, I’m not investing my hard-earned money in a car that will plummet in value the minute the news hits.
I sure hope the bondholders and UAW can come to an agreement out of court, or we could see the end of GM, with taxpayer money going to bankruptcy lawyers instead of autoworkers.
GM’s 50+ year decline in market share began with the forced retirement of Harley Earl in 1958. In 1956, he laid out the blueprint for future success, which GM’s brass (Bill Mitchell, Jack Gordon, Fred Donner) completely opposed.
http://www.carofthecentury.com/answer_to_gm%27s_market_share_plunge.htm
Key to that success was a new generation of smaller, more efficient cars- a trend that GM brass ignored, in favor of building ever larger, ever heavier, ever less-efficient cars and trucks:
“… “millions of American consumers” were supposed to inherent countless beautifully manufactured small modern cars, like these, moving forward into the 1960s and beyond. Instead, the jealous Financial Treasury Office administrators of GM pulled off a silent coup in the late 1950s and grabbed the leadership reins away from Earl and his advanced guard of hybrid Auto Design engineers (who were directly responsible for cementing this auto-maker near a 50% market share during the mid-twentieth century). The new financial team ushered in and went on to manufacture millions upon millions of bigger cars and trucks in America, many of which were substandard in design and engineering. By the 1970s and beyond, all GM’s products were wholeheartedly touched (cursed) by the new elite GM treasury office management team. These leading players of GM were subsequently followed by the next group to come out of the GM financial treasury office, and so on and so on…eventually leading GM’s products all the way to where this company is today at the end of 2008. Essentially, all GM’s CEOs of the last 50 years played their own unique part in the largest destruction of wealth in the history of modern business.”
And the imports capitalized on the trend, while GM market share slipped every year since the early 1960s. Loss of market share indicates that they ignored a growing base of future customers, starting in the late 1950s.
I think manufacturers have a higher responsibility to their customers, to their employees, to their stockholders, and to the public in general to make responsible products.
I’m familiar with the argument that GM “only built what the consumers wanted.”
After all, it’s well evident that consumers also want drugs, hookers, and cheap booze- but it really isn’t responsible for anyone to provide those, is it?
Take a look back at what Harley Earl had to say about it back in the 1940s and 1950s. As long as he was steering the ship, things went well for GM, and his philosophy may save GM yet.
1949 – “Styling [design] is the modern art of industry. Styling puts punch into modern merchandizing. It is the subtle stuff of sales leadership in today’s style-sophisticated world. For in the American market place, style means beauty…and beauty means value. Design and beauty not only command attention, but they are the very foundation of living, changing progress…not only in automobiles but in all man’s handiwork.”
1956 – “The art of automobile design has progressed, until today it is regarded as one of the most important factors in the marketing of the automobile.”
1956 – “Do all you can. Don’t hold anything back. If you do, it will be obsolete tomorrow.”
http://www.carofthecentury.com/small_car_trend.htm
Obviously written before the auto industry “bailout”:
“The ‘Small Car Trend’ is one of the largest in America’s auto world over the last 50 years. Not surprisingly, this entire development relates closely to the mightiest battle ever won in modern business history, too. Of course Detroit’s auto makers want to continue denying any factual losses and/or disclose any historical information on this decades long invasion of foreign cars…that was obviously never supposed to dethrone America’s auto capital (Detroit) from it’s lofty perch by the end of the 20th century. Plus, beginning in the summer of 2008, Detroit’s leading auto execs sure as heck don’t want masses of American car consumers to figure things out, and then panic, and go out and buy ’small cars’ because of super spiking gas prices. As usual, the foreign car companies are exceedingly more poised to profit from this sensitive activity that obviously effects car buyers decision making process. As usual, Detroit’s auto makers are on the loosing end of this giant trend where billions of dollars are at stake every business quarter.”
GM has one more chance to get it right. They can’t afford to get it wrong- again.
Ray:
I hate to burst your bubble but Toyota is struggling right now. I understand that as an American you may feel obligated to worship Toyota and presume that GM is behind Toyota in every aspect of the car business but that is just not the case. Hybrids are about 10% of Toyota’s volume and they represent 2.5% of the US market. You and countless other posters who come here to bash GM need to get a handle on some basic facts. Hybrids are a niche right now. GM cannot save itself by selling hybrids, especially considering hybrids are likely barely profitable. Toyota’s sales are down, they are losing billions per quarter, their designs are stale and their average owner is older than ever. THey also have too many nameplates, underutilized factories in the US and have expanded too fast. Toyota is a few years from being where GM was 10 years back. GM’s plan was inspired by Hyundai’s but it’s superior to Hyundai’s and that is what matters.
Stan:
Have you seen the MAlibu, Aura, CTS or Enclave? How are those vehicles less dynamic looking than competing Asian branded products? You find the Camry and Accord to be stimulating designs? How about the Honda Pilot or 2009 Acura TL? Gm’s design can stand toe to toe with anything coming out of Japan. In recent years its no contest in my book. Japanese design has hit a wall and I would suggest they start looking to steal designers from Audi and GM. If you honestly think that GM’s current designs are inferior to what is coming from Toyota and Honda these days I suspect you will never buy a GM vehicle because you are too partial to imports.
JoshP:
I think you need to read up on the Volt. It has NOTHING to do with the EV1. It will have a gas engine, state of the art Lithium batteries, a 4 passenger capacity and a range of a few hundred miles. It is NOT a simple evolution of the EV1. Tesla vehicles are expensive, VERY limited production and have a range limited by the battery charge. The fact that Tesla can build a few hundred pricey electric sports cars per year is irrelevant with respect to the Volt. The Volt will be cheaper, more widely available and more practical. It will also use a superior battery system. Tesla is a tiny automaker that caters to socially conscious celebrities and other wealthy buyers.
Mark,
We must think alike. I was thinking GM needed to boost confidence and you posted my thoughts exactly.
Could GM offer incentives like ONSTAR renewal after the first year using GM credit card points. That would really catch their attention. ONSTAR is really a great feature.
Also, GM could offer way to buy two vehicles with incentives. I know those who are in need of two new vehicles and might be enticed to buy both from GM at once with a special incentive. There are some around the Orlando area who have three new Cadillacs in the drive way so it happens more than you think. There are some with enough points on their American Express Black to walk in and pay cash, its a great way for a dad to buy his son or daughter a new CTS-V.
The world can keep its bad news. We are all about winning and we aren’t giving up.
The only commitment and confidence I want is that Hummer, the #1 truck brand will stand and survive.
My lease is up in May make your decision.
You stand with me I stand with you. You leave me I leave you…. forever.
The bad thing about GM is all the legacy thinking. Like it is so hard for them to get rid of these brands. All kind of money is being thrown about. Just pay off these franchise holders and be done with these brands. To be competitive all you need is Chevy and Cadillac. Think Toyota and Lexus. Do Cadillacs need to be a tier above Buick? Cadillac could handle it all just like Lexus. By the way I am getting tired of the forced prismatic design of Cadillac. I think a smoothing and simplicity cleansing is overdue. There is a lack of organic inevitability about the designs. Very forced and too much bling.
Personally I like the concept Saab design best of anything I have seen, but again GM just can put out clean looking muscular cars like this. I actually think one of the better designs GM has done in the last 20 years is the Pontiac Soltice for it’s organic simplicity. Too bad that could not have inspired a Mini like or Fiat 500 hatch.
I wish GM would make just six exciting cars like that and they could recapture lots of market share. VW and Audi each make just a few models.
I’m not sure I get this. You’re going to support people that lose their jobs in making payments using money that you don’t have? Actually, aren’t you so far in the red, you asked us (taxpayers) to give you money. I’m cool with helping people out. But, I’d like to have a say in what I’m helping them out with. When you’re doling out my money, it should only be for hybrids or 4 banger pickup trucks.
Anyway, thanks for spending my money! Love you guys and I’m on my way out to by a GM vehicle!!!
Will the prices go down? Let’s get real. People need help. Not promises,
I think this program is only good up to 31st of May.
Ya Rally on all right while suppliers of these so called Americian made cars goes from America to Canada
http://woodstocksentinelreview.com/ArticleDisplay.aspx?e=1503319
I will not buy a car from you.
We The People gave you money to stay in business and you cost Americians jobs
Sheth,
By bringing out hybrids and EVs quickly, Toyota is learning from real-world experience and can produce more refined and reliable vehicles with these newer technologies faster. Secondly, they also get brand recognition because they were essentially first-to-market. Those two factors are a huge benefit when the hybrid segments really get rolling. You seem to be arguing that GM should not be bringing out hybrid full-size trucks, or the Volt for that matter. How do you get practice with new technologies and find out what issues consumers will have without being in the market?
With regard to this new / old Total Confidence thing, if manufacturers have such high confidence in their quality, why not offer the 50K miles bumper-to-bumper warranty? Hyundai did (I think it was Hyundai) when they first made a huge push into the US market. I think that’s what gave consumers the confidence to buy a relatively unknown brand that offered very low entry prices.
Total Confidence…. good. GM Active employees NOT eligible…. bad ! Won’t even consider protecting your own employees. Poor message to send to the troops.
Michigan State earning it’s way to the Final Four also presents a study in contrasts with the likes of the auto executives who let the world, particularly the Japanese and Koreans, pass them by while they themselves crawled along in the slow lane, either devoid of innovative ideas or enacting them at a snail’s pace.
Had Michigan State lost, they’d be out, headed home, essentially fired. Their appearance at the big dance is a shining example of pure capitalism, survival of the fittest, at its best. The fact that it took 8 years and the government to get rid of Rick Wagoner as the head of GM is capitalism at its worst. Cronyism trumping creativity. Government intervention instead of free market forces running the show.
Michigan State is my sentimental favorite next weekend. It’d be nice to bring Motown’s residents a tiny sliver of joy in the midst of their troubles.
http://www.loosekannon.com
Great comments all the way around. A few thoughts:
GM Total Confidence isn’t a transfer of taxpayer money. The Vehicle Value Protection and Payment Protection are plans offered by third parties. We pay the initial cost for that plan and the contract is actually between the customer and the third party. We use currently-allocated marketing money which we hope will be a more effective spend of the limited dollars we have to market our vehicles. Using money more efficiently is good for taxpayers.
GM Total Confidence is clearly the best all-around protection pacakge out there for consumers when you add all the pieces together. No one else has it. That’s good for customers — and if it drives additional business to GM, good for taxpayers too.
Great dialogue on the Tesla, Volt and EV-1. All great electric vehicles and all quite different for many of the reasons noted.
Clearly, folks either want us to succeed or they don’t — but as one in the trenches, I can tell you that we’re not giving up — we’re going to restructure, as Fritz said yesterday, “Deeper and faster.”
Thanks for spending time on the blog.
I think the Total Confidence plan is good and will help to bring in revenue granted its partially a copy cat of Hyundai’s marketing strategy. Nevertheless, as a GM employee who is worried about losing his job I am a bit peeved that the Protection Plan is not valid for GM employees. GM employees almost exclusively by GM products and we are scared to buy cars right now. My lease was up on Monday but I had to extend it because I don’t know if I will be employeed come May. Doesn’t it make sense for GM to get GM employees to buy cars as well. Furthermore, shouldn’t we protect our own versus the outside. You may say, well you get a GM discount and a severance package. Well anyone can get the GM discount with a voucher and the severance package is a whole lot shorter than a 60 month car payment or the 9 months of payments that GM is offering. I know a lot of fellow GM employees share the same sentiment becuase I’ve heard people talking. Nevertheless, I have a GMAC Mortgage, GMAC homeowners insurance, GMAC car insurance and a GM car payment wouldn’t you want to protect me, if I get laid off.
In my opinion, that 5 year – 100K warranty is a little misleading since the typical driver only drives about 12,000 per year. This means that the total mileage on a typical car will only be about 60,000 when the 60th month of the warranty expires.
Make it a flat 100,000 miles – REGARDLESS of time, and I may start listening more.
My last GM vehicle (2002 Sonoma) had suffered catastrophic failure at 70,000 miles cause by some leaky cooling system or cracked block. The heater stopped working in September and the shop tests showed that coolant was somehow present in the oil. The vehicle still started and drove fine except no heat! It left poor impression with me when I went to the dealer to find out it would have cost me almost $5000 to repair it.
I traded it in for a Honda, which had super ratings from Consumer Reports.
BTW – my friends Rondevous is having similar symptoms that my truck had. The heater is failing too. Same engine type I believe.
My 2 cents (or more).
I think GM should offer the employee discount to everyone especially in these troubled times. Otherwise the general public may feel that they are subsidizing GM employees and their relatives.
Mike,
I think the 12,000 mile/year is a historical number that people keep using. I bet that number is higher now. People live ever further from their jobs and in general people just drive more than they used to. Regardless of that I don’t think GM or any manufacturer could put an unlimited amount of time on their warrenty’s. I bet more than a few of the new Camaro’s are going to be garage queens. It might take 30 years for those to travel 100,000 miles. You can’t expect something to last that long, even if you don’t drive it often. Maybe 10 years would make more sense, but unlimited…that’s streching it.
Mark,
Onward with the the GM Total Confidence! I am a GM retiree living in Mexico, and I would like to buy a GMC Acadia here. Similar to the U.S., potential customers are concerned about future value of their investment. Is there somethng in the works to extend the Vehicle Value Protection program to Mexico? And, because financing is very expensive here, what happens if the vehicle is paid for in cash?
“I think GM should offer the employee discount to everyone especially in these troubled times.”
Aren’t we all GM employees now? Or, is it that all GM employees now work for us? Anyway, “One for all ~ all for one.”
~ Unus pro omnibus, omnes pro uno ~
I’m very glad to see this development, Mark. Unfortunately for GM, you guys really have to reestablish your credibility in the market as if you were brand new on the scene; even harder is that GM has to reestablish itself in spite of the baggage of past perceptions. I really hope everybody at GM understands this.
When folks are concerned about losing their jobs they should consider options other than purchasings a new vehicle. Perhaps they should not purchase one, at all. If they find that they just have to have a replacement vehicle then perhaps they should purchase a pre-owned one. Encouraging people to purchase a new vehicle and agreeing to make payments for a certain length of time if they lose their job encourages folks to not be accountable for their actions. Hey, don’t worry about making your car payment, house payment, etc. The government or some company will do it for you.
Mark,
I hope GM does succeed on turn around plan. A few suggestions.
Suggest GM Dealers get a few cars and a salespeople to a mall or grocery store to show
and test drive new GM cars. Especially in cities. D.C. has one Chevy dealer.
GM sticker prices are too high. A $30,000 Malibu is not a value.
You cannot get a red Malibu LS
Impala outside mirrrors have been too small for 4 years. 2013 is too long for Impala update.
Advertise the Lucerne and it will sell.
Roger:
My point was that hybrids are a small part of the market. I get sick of people acting like GM’s problems would be solved if they simply sold more hybrids. It would help their image (in some circles) but it wouldn’t solve their financial problems. Toyota has one high volume hybrid called the Prius. The other hybrids Toyota makes sell no more than 35k units a year, some are way under that figure. Toyota is about to post a large yearly loss so the notion that being first to market with hybrids will spell financial success is dubious. Hybrid sales will take off for everyone if gas prices increase to 2008 levels. Yes, Toyota will sell more hybrids if this happens but so will GM, Honda and Ford. GM had the misfortune of bringing out several hybrid models just as gas prices were headed back towards $1.75/gallon. I am still waiting for someone (anyone) to acknowledge that GM is ahead of at least half the industry when it comes to hybrids.
How can I have total confidence in a company that constantly changes its product names, therefore having to build up a market presence once again for the new nameplate?
Cobalt-keep it. Cruze is ridiculous
G6-go back to Grand Am
G8-go back the Grand Prix
Just say no to the G3 and G5
OT-how about a 4 door built on the Camaro platform-a Chevy Chevelle? A $20,000 4 door RWD Vehicle that gets 29MPG Freeway would get you instant credibility in Cali.
Sheth,
Your way of thinking is what got this company into trouble in the first place. I am not bashing your views but the Prius sold in 2007 183,000 units of that one car. Didnt GM’s entire pontiac divisional line up sell the same amount of vehicles but had 8 different models. The hybrid is no longer a niche product. as stricter fuel efficiency requirements make their way around the globe we will see industry innovation in an industry that has long been resting on their past successes and technologies.
Think of the cost savings if GM had one car that sold 183,000 units for the year in the U.S. alone and the cost savings if it could do with 1 car model, what it takes an entire brand and 8 vehicles to produce for the company. your R and D costs drastically drop because your producing one well put together futuristic vehicle instead of 8 bland ones that mostly get sent to rental agencies.
I personally dont believe the Volt will be like the prius because there is a huge price difference. Because GM has not been active in developing alternative fuel vehicles and killed their EV-1 program they are miles behind in both price and technology and their volt product witll showcase that with its 10,000-20,000 dollar price difference between itself and the Toyota Prius.
183,000 units of one single car here in america is HUGE, dont kid yourself about hybrids being a niche unworthly of investment or exploration by automotive companies, it just must be done in the correct way. playing catch-up to competitors surely wont get GM there.
In my opinion, much of GM’s problem comes down to one thing: PERCEPTION. GM has some great products and its quality is on par with the competition, but GM has failed to change consumers’ old notions that go back decades.
If I were in charge of GM Marketing, I would find a results -oriented ad agency that could deliver a hard-hitting campaign that in no uncertain terms proves that GM is not only as good as the competition, but better in many areas.
Alex D.,
I agree with you that they need more hybrids, but don’t compare the Pruis to the Pontiac line. You want to talk huge numbers, the Silverado sold about 465,000 and that’s not even counting the Sierra. The Ford F-150 sold over a half a million. And guess what, neither are even close to the Pruis in FE.
Hybrids are a nitch right now. Do they deserve investment? Yes. However, GM can’t just stop everything else just to make hybrids like some people seem to think.
Tim,
No one is saying that GM products in general do not sell, but Toyota has a first mover advantage as well as honda. but when you break out the numbers there is a business case for hybrid vehicles by looking at the toyota numbers. please read the full texts of my comments before creating a reply. As I said it was not about bashing anything but the company must embrace technology and alternate ways of doing business. by being a late comer, they are offering their hybrid volt vehicle at $40,000 compared to Toyota who recently cut the price of their newest edition prius to $20,500 base price. so at nearly double the price do we think this GM hybrid will get anywhere near the sales of the prius absolutely not, but the business case for affordable,fuel efficient, environmentally friendly vehicles is there.
I compared the Prius to the entire pontiac line to show just how much this vehicle sells. this one vehicle sold more units of one vehicle than the entire line up of either Mercury or Pontiac in 2007, that is truly significant. obviously people will have differing opinions, no one was trying to say certain GM brands dont have value or discount the GMC line up or Chevrolet, just note a major area of underinvestment and the fact that the major hopes GM is pinning on this Chevrolet Volt will not actually come to fruition or achieve near the sales of the refined now in its fifth edition and significantly improved, and comes with a major price cut, the toyota prius. I welcome disagreement but no one can argue the numbers ot the advantage toyota has built up by reinventing the automotive business and changing the competitive landscape worldwide.
Ray Smith,
An add campaign isn’t enough to change GM’s problems. Nor is it a wise place to spend money. GM needs a new image (I suppose part of that is advertising). But because of legacy buyers they won’t do that. People simply don’t want to give GM a chance or even listen. GM needs to change the press stories by making products that good reviews get written about. They need to be at the top of every list of quality, customer satisfaction, long term quality, consumer reports, JD power etc… They need to fix their resale values as well. There are a whole bunch of things GM could change… They have to give their cars features people want and make them in demand (to help keep their value up).
Comments from one of my discussion groups re: the VW “1 liter” vehicle.
I think GM could make something similar for far less.
For those who aren’t aware, it’s a tandem 2-seater vehicle that gets over 238 mpg, and has impressive performance from a 299cc diesel engine.
The “Freeway” vehicle referenced is a single-seat, 3-wheel commuter “car” built in Minnesota from 1979 to 1982. It was guaranteed to get 100 mpg at a constant 45 mph with the base 12 hp engine, or 80 mph at 45 mph with the larger 16 hp engine.
WHL
VW 1L
“You may remember the VW 1L. At 639 lbs, 8.4 HP from its 299 cc 1
cylinder engine, it’s a bit like the Freeway might have been, if designed on
an unlimited budget. (It can carry 2 passengers & go 100 Km on 1L of
gas… about 238 MPG.)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Volkswagen_1-litre_car#cite_note-2
“I stopped paying attention to the rig because the CEO who designed it
was fired, partly because he “wasted” funds on research instead of
turning out profits. When he drove it to the ceremony to hand over power
to the new CEO, it was made quite clear that VW had no intentions of
producing the car, as it would not be affordable.
“About a year ago, they apparently changed their mind. Somewhere around
2010, a version will be produced for limited production. It’ll have many
of the same features, except will be driven by a more powerful 2
cylinder engine. I doubt any will be imported to the US, or be
affordable to the average dude if they were.”
Re: VW 1L
“I think the price mentioned for the “1 liter” would be around $40,000, and it
wouldn’t meet US EPA, DOT, or FHTSA rules.
“GM could probably build something similar for under $15,000 if they wanted to, but there likely wouldn’t be sufficient sales.”
WHL
Re: [Free-way Club] Re: VW 1L
“Thanks. I hadn’t heard that price, but I was guessing somewhere above
$20K and double that price doesn’t surprise me for VW.
“Not meeting the US rules doesn’t surprise, either. Some of the most
interesting autos are blocked from entering the US, by that protection
scheme. Besides, I can’t imagine that car in the crash tests.”
For a long time I have enjoyed reading all the different ideas and comments about GM and the automotive industry in general on this site. I have enjoyed people are if not passionate about GM and cars than I am. Today I have read by Alex D. some of the most insightful thought about GM and there recovery than anything before. Of course I understand that this is all a matter of opinion and we all know what they say about those, but man I don’t know what he does for a living or what but I have to say GOOD STUFF…. I would also be interested to know what if any GM insiders that read this blog think. I hope GM is around for a long long time, or at least until my Corvette is done because I need to order a crate big block…. thanks all
I think everyone that wonders how the american auto industry got so screwed up would really like to see this if you have not already. All of the research was done originally back in the late 80’s. http://books.google.com/books?id=8pCElwGZhSUC thanks.
Alex,
I agree that Toyota has an advantage over GM. I also think there is a market for hybrids. It just sounded like you were saying that the 183,000 Prius’ that Toyota sold were the only thing keeping them going.
Also think there are differences between that Volt and Pruis that call for some price increase. I do think $40k is too high, but I do think it’s worth more than the Pruis.
Also if you say that 183,000 Pruis’ sold proves there is a market and it’s worthy of investment, then don’t think that the 465,000 Silverado’s GM sold is worthy of continued investment? The thing that gets me is that people (not you necessarily) think trucks are now completely worthless and that hybrid are the only thing anyone should make. I just wanted to point out that, while yes, hybrids are a growing market, they aren’t the only thing out there.
And lastly, you’re probably right that the Volt won’t sell as well as GM would like or produce the income they need. You blame this on that fact that they were late to the party, and now are behind. I don’t disagree with that, but the past is the past. They can’t change it. At least they’re trying to put out the first plug in hybrid. It just seems that you’re saying, “well they are so far behind, they might as well just not do it”, but then go on to say “hybrid investment is worth it”. Which is it?
Beaugrand,
Sorry but I’ll take my 2500HD any day. Like the last poster said “I couldn’t imagine that car in crash tests”. And it would be scary getting on to the freeway with thing at 76lbs/HP.
I don’t think it’s a “protection scheme” because GM, Ford, and Chrysler were calling for changes to US Diesel regulation for years before it went into effect – to no avail. It’s environmentalism run amok and it’s actually (like lots of environmentalism) causing MORE pollution. Why do you think this country’s electrical power production is stuck somewhere in the 1930’s?
How are you going to make my payment when you can’t make your own payments?
Sporty Spice,
Read much?
Straight from John McDonald – GM Spokesman, Detroit:
“GM Total Confidence isn’t a transfer of taxpayer money. The Vehicle Value Protection and Payment Protection are plans offered by third parties. We pay the initial cost for that plan and the contract is actually between the customer and the third party. We use currently-allocated marketing money which we hope will be a more effective spend of the limited dollars we have to market our vehicles. Using money more efficiently is good for taxpayers.”
Tim –
Understand irony?
Of course we know what McDonald said, but there’s still delicious irony in GM saying they’ll pay our car payments after they’ve had to go to Washington asking for billions. That’s what Sporty is pointing out.
“We use currently-allocated marketing money which we hope will be a more effective spend of the limited dollars we have to market our vehicles. Using money more efficiently is good for taxpayers.”
John McDonald,
Please give us some insight: How do you make the tough choice between this program and keeping GM in NASCAR? After all, those marketing dollars are limited, aren’t they? I’m sure you must be keeping a firewall between the Federal money you receive, and the money that goes to Total Confidence and NASCAR.
Tim I dont believe things GM does are worthless and dont think it should be an AND/OR scenario for either producing fuel efficient hyrbid cars or heavy duty trucks. GM is a full-service automaker but the auto industry has changed dramatically, while GM has not. by cutting out this lucrative area they are giving toyota a full competitive advantage.
Ive never advocated in any of my posts that GM stop making trucks or other vehicles other than 4 cylinder hybrid sedans, but am quick to point out that they are at a big disadvantage in terms of price, development, and adaptability. now that the prius and hyrbid engine variant that toyota offers is into their 5th development cycle, many of the bugs have been worked out. not so with late-comer GM.
i hope you dont feel that I am against GM , because Im not at all. I take the time to point out flaws and note certain deficiencies so that the company and managers and anyone who reads any of these posts can look at things through a different angle. I do want this company to succeed or else I wouldnt waste my time blogging about the important issues and troubles the company faces.
I wonder if Toyota is dumping Prius’ or how much profit they make on each one.
If it is the former, the gov’t should look into it.
“Sorry but I’ll take my 2500HD any day. Like the last poster said “I couldn’t imagine that car in crash tests”. And it would be scary getting on to the freeway with thing at 76lbs/HP.”
The production version will have a 2000cc engine and lots more power (at a considerable cost in fuel economy). It’s also likely to be sturdier, much heavier, and designed to withstand a crash.
I think you missed the point that it represents the kind out-of-the-box thinking that will be necessary in the years ahead, when petroleum-based fuels edge past $10/gallon (2009 dollars) here in the US.
Alex:
My thinking has gotten GM nowhere since I have never made any product decisions for GM. You keep making an example of the ONLY mass produced hybrid and chose to ignore TOTAL MARKETSHARE. When did I say the Prius hasn’t been successful? I never said such a thing. I said the hybrids are a niche in the market. Saying GM is loosing money because it doesn’t have a Prius competitor is about as logical as saying GM is in trouble because it doesn’t sell an S class/7 series competitor. The Prius is by far the most successful product in a very small segment of the market.
As for the Volt, I don’t think anyone has ever claimed it will rival the Prius in sales up front. The Volt is a very different product with some very new technology. You are the one assuming it’s designed to go head to head with the Prius, not GM. The current Prius is relatively affordable and yet it gets outsold by numerous gasoline powered models such as the Camry, Accord, Civic, Corolla, Malibu, Focus, Silverado, etc. You are making a big deal out of Prius sales but the Prius is hardly a major profit generator for Toyota. I would venture to guess that a Tundra with a huge rebate is still more profitable than a Prius selling near MSRP. The Prius is just too cheap to be seriously profitable. No automaker makes most of its money at the lower end of the market. Luxury cars, high end crossovers and trucks are the profit generators.
“your R and D costs drastically drop because your producing one well put together futuristic vehicle instead of 8 bland ones that mostly get sent to rental agencies.”
Those kinds of comments show that you have little idea about how platform sharing works. The entire purpose of platform sharing is to generate vehicles that LOOK very different but are essentially the same. You are contending that GM spends a fortune to make multiple vehicles off the same platform but there is no proof of that. Speaking of rental agencies, Toyota, Nissan and Hyundai are making generous use of them these days. The Prius is actually purchased by numerous fleet operators, including rental agencies. I find it interesting that you are benchmarking Toyota and yet you claim that GM is the one making “bland” vehicles. Do you see lots of compelling vehicles in Toyota’s lineup? I don’t. The problem with Toyota obsessed people like yourself is that you cannot help but to embrace wild double standards. The Prius is very efficient but it’s one of the blandest cars on the market. The 2009 model is a mediocre car with great gas mileage. I have driven one so I know the real story. It has sloppy steering, hard plastics and an unrefined engine. I don’t think I need to comment on the acceleration or handling. Great mileage doesn’t mean a great car.
“I welcome disagreement but no one can argue the numbers ot the advantage toyota has built up by reinventing the automotive business and changing the competitive landscape worldwide.”
You need to put down the Kool Aid for a second. You are inferring that the entire industry is in agreement that hybrids are the future of cars and failure to launch high volume hybrids is a recipe for being left behind. Let’s be clear: Toyota is the only major automaker who has invested heavily in high volume hybrids and made a hybrid drivetrain a major part of its advertising strategy. In Europe support for hybrids are tepid. Until recently the head of Nissan and numerous European automotive CEOs dismissed hybrids as having a poor business model. Even today some remain unconvinced and companies like Mazda have said they will focus on diesels. Most experts feel that within 10 years or so hybrids will still constitute a modest % of new car sales. One reason for this is the ICE keeps getting more efficient and the prices of hybrid systems will remain high for some time.
“GM is a full-service automaker but the auto industry has changed dramatically, while GM has not. by cutting out this lucrative area they are giving toyota a full competitive advantage.”
Alex:
Do you know anything about any automakers other than Toyota and GM? How many hybrids does Nissan sell? How about Hyundai? How about Mazda? How about Mercedes? While Toyota has a clear lead of GM right now you fail to acknowledge that GM is ahead of many of its competitors. The two mode system that BMW and MB will be launching soon is based on GM’s technology. Did you know that? Have you ever wondered why they chose to work with GM rather than attempt to license Toyota technology?
“now that the prius and hyrbid engine variant that toyota offers is into their 5th development cycle, many of the bugs have been worked out. not so with late-comer GM.”
What proof do you have of this? Have you read reviews of the GM two mode hybrids? They have been praised for smooth operation and refinement. What “bugs” need to be worked out? Gm has honed its two mode hybrid system over the years since it has been in use in buses for quite some time. You also say that GM has a huge disadvantage in adaptability but Toyota is the one who has not been able to put its hybrid system in large trucks or SUVs. Considering how far ahead Toyota is in hybrid tech you would think they would be able to come up with something to surpass GM’s large hybrids.
if you are a GM fan and want them to succeed you could start by sticking to the facts. Its hard to assess what GM needs to do when you don’t even know what they are doing right now.
Nate:
“GM needs to change the press stories by making products that good reviews get written about. ”
Where have you been for the last 3 years or so. Have you not read reviews of the Malibu, G8, Aura, CTS, Enclave, etc? As usual you seem to be a step behind in your perceptions of GM’s products. Throughout this bailout fiasco the automotive media has made it clear that today’s GM puts out competitive products.
I saw one of those lame total confidence “rally” commercials this weekend during the NCAA tournament. I couldn’t help notice that you touted the “best warranty” in the business which turned out to be a 5 year/100,000 miles powertrain-only warranty.
Why powertrain-only, instead of bumper-to-bumper? In my experience, the most likely things to fail or become irritations are non-powertrain items. Things such as power windows that fail; rattles and squeaks inside the doors and under the dash; electrical system; etc.
If you really want to say you have the best warranty in the business, why not make it bumper-to-bumper?
Beaugrand,
You say the production version will have a larger engine, be heavier and of course meet emissions. In other words – just like any other subcompact. Not really thinking out of the box.
Keeping the original would be thinking out of the box. It’s just that not many people would buy it for the reasons I mentioned.
Alex,
I understand you’re not against GM. I guess I am thinking that pointing out things GM can’t change like not getting into hybrid fast enough isn’t going to help. Instead maybe point out things they should do better in the future.
Let me get this straight…. GM received millions of taxpayer bailout $$$$ as a reward for the “failure of management to manage.” Now GM is using taxpayer $$$$ to pay losers who cannot afford to pay for their GM purchase obligations???? Sounds like the sub-zero mortgage debacle that got us into this mess in the first place.
SOUNDS LIKE GM HAS BEEN INSTRUCTED TO SPREAD THE WEALTH AROUND, & GM CORPORATE MANAGEMENT CAVED IN & FAILED TO MANAGE AGAIN!!
Poor W. Edwards Deming must be spinning is grave.
Angus Bohannon:
“We use currently-allocated marketing money which we hope will be a more effective spend of the limited dollars we have to market our vehicles. Using money more efficiently is good for taxpayers.”
John McDonald,
Please give us some insight: How do you make the tough choice between this program and keeping GM in NASCAR? After all, those marketing dollars are limited, aren’t they? I’m sure you must be keeping a firewall between the Federal money you receive, and the money that goes to Total Confidence and NASCAR.
Angus — Good questions. We’ve made some tough choices — and that includes significant reductions in promotions and advertising including motorsports. NASCAR provides one of the best returns on investment of any of our promotional activities. It’s worth supporting to help us ‘move the metal’ but all of our marketing activities are subject to potential cost cuts and ongoing justification.
As far as a ‘firewall,’ there really isn’t one in that sense, that I’m aware of. Federal loan monies are used for general operating purposes — and that includes advertising and promoting our products. One of the many things we all agree on is that whatever we can do to increase sales and generate revenues is good for the company and taxpayers. Our intention is to repay all of our Federal loans — and the best way to do that is by generating revenue from sales.
I hope this helps.
“You say the production version will have a larger engine, be heavier and of course meet emissions. In other words – just like any other subcompact. Not really thinking out of the box.”
While the production version will have a more powerful engine and weigh more (because it will be made of less-exotic plastics, composites, and metals than the prototype), it may get a fraction of the 238+ mpg of the prototype. Even a 50% reduction in fuel consumption still gets well over 100 mpg, that’s a quantum leap better than the 30 mpg target the GM and most other carmakers seem to see as the “gold standard” of economy. The tandem seating and narrow track, which results in a much reduced frontal area, greatly reduces aerodynamic drag and increases efficiency. 100 mpg may not qualify as “out of the box” (I think it does)
How well tandem seating is received by consumers would be the big question. If the car is used exclusively as a solo commuter, it might not be an issue; the extra seat space could be used to haul groceries.
It might not seem to be desirable for dates, but tandem seating hasn’t discouraged motorcycle dating.
This isn’t the first time GM has been blindsided by Hyundai. Way to go, GM, keep getting your best ideas from Korea! A bit of original creative marketing from your side time to time wouldn’t be a bad idea either.
sheth — you are getting nowhere bashing people who come to this blog to bash GM. Your tone is not what will bring more people into GM’s camp. When you admonish others for being anti-GM, well honestly, can you blame them? GM has been in denial for so long I think employees may actually believe all of GM PR’s spins. I think GM is starting to come around. But it got it wrong for more than 30 years. You can’t blame people for regurgitating stereotypes about GM from years past. Just because GM had a couple of good cars this decade doesn’t erase decades of sloth and laziness. Reputations don’t change overnight. It took years and years of poor management for GM to get where it is now. Don’t expect people to suddenly praise GM because you insulted them on this blog.
Ken:
I admonish people for being ignorant and then coming here to lecture, not for being “anti-GM”. If people have legitimate points than I have no qualms with them. If you come here as some lifelong Toyota/Honda fan to repeat a bunch of inaccurate generalizations rooted in the 1970s than I will correct you. 90% of the negative comments here offer nothing constructive for GM so pardon me if I call people out for doing nothing but using this forum as a place to vent. It’s pretty obvious who actually cares about GM improving it’s image and product and who is just here to show off. Your position is the same as so many others who waste time posting here: you want to make sure no one forgets about GM products from the 70s and 80s. We are in the year 2009 and you want to tell me I should join you in recapping GM’s subpar vehicles from 20-30 years ago. I’ll have to pass on that. To be honest I say anyone who wont buy a competitive product in 2009 because of something made in 1989 is not worthy of my respect. I am not concerned about “punishing” GM- I will leave that to you and those who share your views. I don’t think there are many people who are not aware of GM’s past products. This blog is not about past products and thus I don’t see the need to bring up 25 year old duds from GM in every single topic. I don’t care if you are turned off by my approach or my comments. Based on your comments I can surmise you won’t be buying a GM product under any circumstances. In fact, I find people like you who are interested in maintaining a vendetta against GM would rather pay more for an inferior product from one of their competitors. I cannot align myself with that sort of backwards logic.
I also question your ridiculous notion that GM has gotten it wrong for 30 years. GM’s product has been turning around since the mid to late 1990s. This is not a sudden transformation. The fact that GM has been losing share for 30 years is not the same as GM not producing any nice vehicles in 30 years. If you believe what you are typing here than I am afraid you are woefully out of touch. I can see you have no ideas or suggestions that are worthwhile. You are here to add to the countless lectures that GM bashers leave on this site weekly. You don’t have any new perspective, nor are you willing to give credit where it’s due. There are already at least 10 people beating up on GM’s past product and poor decision making in years past so I assure you that your points have been made already dozens of times.
1-Apr-09: “GM Total Confidence isn’t a transfer of taxpayer money. We use currently-allocated marketing money which we hope will be a more effective spend of the limited dollars we have to market our vehicles.”
7-Apr-09: “As far as a ‘firewall,’ there really isn’t one in that sense, that I’m aware of. Federal loan monies are used for general operating purposes — and that includes advertising and promoting our products.”
Mr. McDonald,
In your April 1st comment you said Total Confidence isn’t a transfer of taxpayer money and that you use “currently-allocated marketing money” for that program. Now I’m confused — does the federal money go towards marketing or not? If “Yes” how can you say TCon isn’t a transfer of taxpayer money? And if “Not,” how do you keep them separate from your general operating funds?
Sheth,
GM must feel mighty fortunate they have you to so stridently defend them.
sheth, my points already having been made dozens of times just shows you how much work GM still has to do on the PR front. GM has for decades been telling the public what it wants them to believe, not what the facts point out. The fact that you assume anyone who comes to this blog to add a less-than-friendly point of view about GM is a Toyota/Honda fanboy shows how little you know about the real world. Many of us who earned our living from GM for many years feel very let down. We were once strong supporters but the company made so many bad decisions along the way that we can no longer trust GM management. I know suppliers out there who refuse to work with GM ever again because of the way they were treated (more accurately, manhandled). Now you expect these people to forget about the past and only focus on the future? You’re either incredibly forgiving or simply clueless about human nature.
A blog is a discussion sheth. GM created this forum so the public could come here and participate as part of the community. Many of us are not coming here “to vent” but to share our stories and our opinions. Why are my opinions — even if they’re based on GM of past — any less worthy than yours? Again, the fact that people are “repeating inaccurate generalizations” just goes to show you how ineffective GM’s spin strategy has been since those days 20-30 years ago. In your world, anyone who doesn’t have anything good to say should be censored. You must have learned your conversational skills from watching Fox News because you’re doing a disservice to GM — your “approach” is not helping to sway any opinions GM’s way. You’re like that uncle everyone sees at Christmas who always means well but ends up making things worse. And unless you are secretly an employee of GM’s communications operation, I doubt you really know what this blog is all about as you claim.
I mean, who died and made you king of Fastlane?
“The fact that GM has been losing share for 30 years is not the same as GM not producing any nice vehicles in 30 years.”
Actually, GM market share has been in decline since 1962, corresponding with the decline of Harley Earl’s influence. Earl was forced out in 1958, it took 4 or 5 years for his influence to be overcome by the long list of lesser-talented men who followed.
Of course they have made some nice vehicles since: the 1963 Riviera (my all-time favorite American car), the 1965 Toronado (second favorite), the 1970 Camaro; I always liked the styling of the 1970 Vega, but the lemon law was undoubtedly inspired by its self-destructing aluminum engine and the automatic rust feature of the sheet metal; the 1974 Chevy pickup was, at that point, one of the best vehicles GM had ever made.
There were some bright spots in the late ’70s, when the bloated superslab cruisers (full size sedans) were “downsized” to a more reasonable size, and the rest of the car lineup trimmed as well. Overall, I didn’t and don’t like the boxy styling of that generation of vehicles, but even the Italians made some ugly cars those years. I’d have to say I liked the 2-door 1978 Cutlass/Regal twins best of the bunch.
The 1980 Camaro was a beautiful reinterpretation. I didn’t care much for anything else GM did in the ’80s.
I like the styling of the 1990-96 Buicks. I realize they’re rebadged Chevys, but the “classic” conservative styling strikes a chord.
I liked the first-gen fwd GM Lumina-based vans- after they blunted the pointy nose; but I think the door sticker warning not to hit yourself in the head is still disturbing… The fwd vans got better overall, but I think they should have stuck with the plastic body panels. And the last styling change, with the bulbous snout, was just too ugly. Too much or too little like an SUV, it looked like the stylists couldn’t decide which look to go for, so they took the “safe” approach. It didn’t work.
The Buick 3.8 V6 is one of the best GM engines ever made.
>”And unless you are secretly an employee of GM’s communications operation, I doubt you really know what this blog is all about as you claim.”
Ken,
I think you’ hit it out of the park with that theory. Now that I think about it, Sheth could very well be an undercover operative from GM’s public relations department whose job is to come into this blog and try to shape opinion.
Ken:
Just explain to us all how telling GM (and the rest of us) that GM made some subpar products in the 80s is getting us ANYWHERE. That’s all that I ask. Lutz has stated many times that GM put out some mediocre vehicles and engaged in cost cutting when they shouldn’t have. This stuff is well known to anyone and everyone. Yes, this blog is about exchanging ideas but you aren’t really offering any new ideas or constructive criticism. We are almost in the 2nd decade of the 21st century and you want to focus the discussion on GM vehicles from the 80s. I agree GM has a PR problem but there is only so much GM can do. If they put out vehicles with decent mileage and engine technology and those vehicles get decent reviews and win awards and people like you are not convinced then I’m not sure what GM can really do. YOu seem pretty upset and bitter towards GM and you don’t want to acknowledge any of the current product. Aside from sending GM execs to personally wash your car I don’t know there is much they can do to win you over.
I was on another site and someone was complaining about GM’s ads comparing the mileage of Chevy and Honda models. Nevermind the fact that the commercial offered accurate information- this guy was defending Honda and bashing the more efficient Chevy products and the commercial. What kind of PR excercise can be done with that kind of mindset? There is a huge percentage of the American public who want to see nothing less than GM and the American auto industry go under. They don’t care if the quality is up to import standards nor do they care if American brands offer the most efficient and most stylish options. These are people who refuse to buy current product because they are mad about product from 20-30 years ago. I don’t feel that is reasonable but I’m sure you would disagree.
“I think you’ hit it out of the park with that theory. Now that I think about it, Sheth could very well be an undercover operative from GM’s public relations department whose job is to come into this blog and try to shape opinion.”
Toby:
You would be incorrect. In fact, I actually own some Ford stock. I do find it interesting that you feel that anyone who doesn’t share Ken’s disdain for GM must be a GM employees. That’s an interesting theory. I assure you no one working for GM would be allowed to speak as frankly and honestly as I do. I respect the GM employees who post here and remain professional in spite of the hostility of the posters on this site. Since I am free to speak my mind I am much more blunt. BTW, not that you asked but there are numerous GM vehicles that I really don’t care for including all Hummers, the Aveo, Canyon/Colorodo and the G6 convertible. My issues with the G6 convertible (as well as Lucerne) center around their powertrains which need to be upgraded. The Cobalt is also long in the tooth but it will be replaced next year with a much better product. Aside from those vehicles I find GM’s current or soon to debut lineup to be competitive. I’m sure saying anything remotely positive will only bring on more attacks but I doubt anyone will offer any substantive criticism of the vehicles and instead focus on past management mistakes and the government loan. What you and others keep missing is I am primarily concerned with the vehicles.
“You would be incorrect. In fact, I actually own some Ford stock.”
Sheth,
That’s exactly what an undercover operative would say.
I thought this blog was to talk autos and what concerns them, not personal attacks.
“In fact, I actually own some Ford stock.”
Don’t we all now own GM stock?
What good is having an extended warranty? GM does not stand behind there product and due to thier current financial situation will look for any loophole they can find to not honor the warranties they already have. I purchased a silverado with the duramax diesel with the expectation 0f getting well over 200,000 miles as any diesel should. I have since found out there is a poor design for the injectors and GM issued an extended warranty to cover this poor design. Unfortunatel within the last year there has been an update to the warranty to restrict the coverage and eliminate the need to cover this $4,000 TO $5,000 cost. I know my GM TOTAL CONFIDENCE is gone and I will never purchase another one.
“Sheth,
That’s exactly what an undercover operative would say.”
Toby:
You got me! You are just too good. I live in Philadelphia and secretly work for GM. In fact, I think anyone who has ever said anything positive about GM is on the payroll because obviously if don’t agree that all their products are crap you MUST be getting a check. I’ll bet Motor Trend was paid to give the CTS Car of the Year. I’ll bet C&D was paid to put three GM vehicles on 10BEST last year. I mean there cannot be any other explanation. Same for those guys at Automobile that claimed the Malibu was superior to Accord and Camry when naming it an All Star. Its a wonder their secret ties to GM haven’t been exposed yet.
My primary beef with GM is their nice guy attitude that permeates how they advertise and deal with the media. The media is woefully misinformed about GM and the auto industry in general but GM execs on TV seem to say little to shoot down the myths. I like the new Chevy commercials with Howie Long- that is how GM should always advertise. Attack the myths and brag about fuel economy. Everything GM does has to be about taking Toyota and Honda head on. Being cordial and allowing biased reporters to twist the facts around to paint the company in a bad light isn’t going to cut it. Let’s see if Henderson brings a more aggressive attitude to the table.
Oh yes, I forgot to mention I am very impressed by Ford’s new products like the Fusion and Taurus. In fact, I would say the Taurus has a few advantages over the Lacrosse for similar money. Don’t tell my employer though!
“I thought this blog was to talk autos and what concerns them, not personal attacks.”
That’s what I used to think. Instead its a forum where people can take turns ripping current and long gone GM management and their decisions. The interesting thing is this is a GM blog and you actually increase your popularity here by deriding anything and everything Gm does. In fact, the less you think of GM products and planning the more credibility you have. I do question why so many who claim to have no interest in GM products and clearly believe superior product is available want to post here so often.
“Oh yes, I forgot to mention I am very impressed by Ford’s new products like the Fusion and Taurus. In fact, I would say the Taurus has a few advantages over the Lacrosse for similar money. Don’t tell my employer though!”
Sheth,
More of your undercover deception* no doubt. You appear to have received exceptionally good training.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
* In Russia they call in maskirova
Toby:
I can only hope you are being funny at this point.. Seriously, anything else would be concerning to me at this stage. I suppose anything I say will be “exactly what an undercover operative would say” from this point forward.
“I suppose anything I say will be “exactly what an undercover operative would say” from this point forward.”
Exactly. Or as Shakespeare had Hamlet say, “Hoist on your own petard.”
What sucks is my crappy Cobalt isn’t protected under this. I think its another way for GM and Chevrolet to slap its customers in the face and another way to tell me my car is a lemon but they won’t have anything to do with fixing it or upholding the warranty. I am sick of paying for warranty work.