[Add1ct]

I don't know about the rest of this community, but I think Wagoner's been nothing but trouble for GM so I am glad to see him go. Not big on the government pushing business around but I agree he had to go, so I'm happy.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/gm_wagoner

[ArmyBimmerDude]

GM had serious problems before Wagoner, but this is what Obama wanted and what he wants, he gets.

[Add1ct]

I know they've had problems for years, but they have not adapted. Not adapting for a couple years is okay, not adapting for a decade or more is just ridiculous.

[BMW F22]

Originally Posted by Add1ct

I know they've had problems for years, but they have not adapted. Not adapting for a couple years is okay, not adapting for a decade or more is just ridiculous.

Dude when you're running that kind of a business not adapting for a few years still is NOT okay. By the time you adapt others would be light years ahead and you have to play catch-up.

[Add1ct]

Originally Posted by BMW E90

Dude when you're running that kind of a business not adapting for a few years still is NOT okay. By the time you adapt others would be light years ahead and you have to play catch-up.

I know, I was just trying to make the point, thanks for hitting the nail on the head though!

[Schm]

(from a friend at Jalopnik)

Rick Wagoner (aka Red Ink Rick), big boss of General motors has been fired. Apparently, it was a condition so GM could continue sucking from the taxpayer teat. He will be replaced by Fritz Henderson, who is basically a carbon copy of Wagoner. Oh boy-o!

http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/gm-...goner-resigns/
http://jalopnik.com/5189532/rick-wag...obamas-request
Discuss.

[lyndon_h]

Wagoner was doing OK. GM as a corp has been on a serious comeback in the last 4 years. But I understand that Obama needed to keep the american public from blowing up, so it had to be done.

[JB135i]

Originally Posted by lyndon_h

Wagoner was doing OK. GM as a corp has been on a serious comeback in the last 4 years. But I understand that Obama needed to keep the american public from blowing up, so it had to be done.

In what respect?

The only two cars that even come close to helping sales are basically going to be DOA.

The VOLT LOL. Even with gas at $5.00 a gallon this car will fail. And the Camaro needed to be out 2 years ago IMO.

Granted, he was on the right track by dropping (or wanting to) basically redundant car lines and some hammering on the UAW but otherwise he = fail.

I know the gub'ment is all over GM (and Chrsyler) now because of the bailout money, but I really want to know why the Dems ignored these cluster f**k's for the last THIRTY YEARS. If they truly "cared" they should have been up these corps. asses decades ago. It was obvious to anyone with 2 brain cells these auto makers were headed for trouble.

Redundant car lines, bad quality, bad design, too many dealerships, enourmous cash obligations to non-producers, and the extreme over-use of the Led Zepplin song in their commercials (LOL, man did they get their moneys worth there).

It's a shame really, with the resources and size of these companies, they could have dominated the Asians and Germans. BUT GM, Chrysler and Ford to a slightly lesser degree sat on their collective asses for the past 20-30 (40) years. They relied on brand loyalty to a fault and then the UAW bleed them out like so many leaches.

I hope they all survive because more competition is better for everyone, especially the consumer, but this move doesn't bode well for anyone on many different levels.

[Add1ct]

^ very well said. What I always tell people is that, if you are in the "car" business and you don't make cars people want to buy then you aren't going to survive, regardless of unions, or retirements or whatever it may be. What frustrates me is that GM has successful stuff in Europe and they still don't bring very many of those designs or engines here at all. It's like they intentionally design bloated crap-mobiles for us!

[jeremyc74]

Originally Posted by Add1ct

^ very well said. What I always tell people is that, if you are in the "car" business and you don't make cars people want to buy then you aren't going to survive, regardless of unions, or retirements or whatever it may be. What frustrates me is that GM has successful stuff in Europe and they still don't bring very many of those designs or engines here at all. It's like they intentionally design bloated crap-mobiles for us!

What do you mean the "don't make cars people want to buy?" They're the fucking number two automaker in the world! (Number one up until this year). If no one wants to buy their cars....how the hell did that happen?


The reason GM is in the situtaion it's in right now is largely because of the global downturn and credit crisis, which they didn't really create. Certainly they had issue before, and didn't have nearly as much cash on hand as they should have to weather something like this, but they are, to a large degree, a victim of the economic situation we find ourselves in.

[lyndon_h]

Originally Posted by JB135i

In what respect?

The only two cars that even come close to helping sales are basically going to be DOA.

The VOLT LOL. Even with gas at $5.00 a gallon this car will fail. And the Camaro needed to be out 2 years ago IMO.

Granted, he was on the right track by dropping (or wanting to) basically redundant car lines and some hammering on the UAW but otherwise he = fail.

I know the gub'ment is all over GM (and Chrsyler) now because of the bailout money, but I really want to know why the Dems ignored these cluster f**k's for the last THIRTY YEARS. If they truly "cared" they should have been up these corps. asses decades ago. It was obvious to anyone with 2 brain cells these auto makers were headed for trouble.

Redundant car lines, bad quality, bad design, too many dealerships, enourmous cash obligations to non-producers, and the extreme over-use of the Led Zepplin song in their commercials (LOL, man did they get their moneys worth there).

It's a shame really, with the resources and size of these companies, they could have dominated the Asians and Germans. BUT GM, Chrysler and Ford to a slightly lesser degree sat on their collective asses for the past 20-30 (40) years. They relied on brand loyalty to a fault and then the UAW bleed them out like so many leaches.

I hope they all survive because more competition is better for everyone, especially the consumer, but this move doesn't bode well for anyone on many different levels.

GM's biggest problem was related to their union contracts not their auto sells. I can agree with you that they have mismanaged things in the past but they have created some decent vehicles for their segments in the last couple of years. Granted, they are not vehicles that we would like to purchase (enthusiasts), but they work for 80% of Americans. They've done also done a good job with fuel economy. Granted, their are still some models that need to go, but if you look at where they are in relation to a few years ago, they've improved greatly.

I'm not saying that they are where they need to be, but they were going in the right direction before the recession.

[e90owner1]

like a lot of the corporations going out of business and recieving government aid, GM was leveraged like 30 times over. with that high of leverage, they didnt have enough equity or cash cushion to survive the credit crises. Hopefully they can pull it off.. I want a silverado for my next car.

[Add1ct]

Originally Posted by jeremyc74

What do you mean the "don't make cars people want to buy?" They're the fucking number two automaker in the world! (Number one up until this year). If no one wants to buy their cars....how the hell did that happen?


The reason GM is in the situtaion it's in right now is largely because of the global downturn and credit crisis, which they didn't really create. Certainly they had issue before, and didn't have nearly as much cash on hand as they should have to weather something like this, but they are, to a large degree, a victim of the economic situation we find ourselves in.

I was referring to what they build for the US market, I thought that was implicit in the post.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by JB135i

In what respect?

The only two cars that even come close to helping sales are basically going to be DOA.

The VOLT LOL. Even with gas at $5.00 a gallon this car will fail. And the Camaro needed to be out 2 years ago IMO.

Granted, he was on the right track by dropping (or wanting to) basically redundant car lines and some hammering on the UAW but otherwise he = fail.

The Camaro did come out too late, but is basically dead with upcoming CAFE shit that GM will have to comply with. It's an awesome car for sure, but GM definitely did drop the ball on that one. And don't even get me started on CAFE....

As for the Volt, it's a victory in concept alone if the car makes it to mass production. The way it uses the hybrid drivetrain offers new thought to the whole concept. This sort of thinking out of the box, quick-reaction project from GM is exactly what they've been missing for so long. Now, will it save them with dramatic profits and sales figures? No. But I do think it's a good sign that maybe they're starting to get the idea. Finally.

[ChrisV]

http://www.autoextremist.com/

And as part of his "shared sacrifice" mantra that he's so good at relentlessly pounding into the American public while framing the domestic automobile industry as some sort of national scourge, Obama demanded and received a body - in this case the body of GM chairman and and CEO Rick Wagoner - so he could hold it up to the American public on one of his administration's custom-built chrome-plated pitchforks and say, "See, I'm doing what I promised! I am slaying the evil dragons of American corporate greed! I will reshape America into a kindler, gentler nation of group hugs while creating a more realistic and caring set of common corporate goals!"

And not only was an ugly precedent set, but America's future has just been turned dark by the realization that our government will not hesitate to reach into every available orifice - corporate or otherwise - and put their stamp on it if it doesn't quite conform to the Obama Administration's Shiny Happy Vision of what this country is supposed to be.

Contrary to the horde of instant pundit-experts out there who don't have the first clue as to what this industry is all about - or what it's like to actually work in this industry - Rick Wagoner was by no means the evil architect of GM's current predicament. Yes, Wagoner made some mistakes, and I have documented them long before the "Rick Wagoner Must Go" train left the pundit station. The Fiat adventure was disastrous, and Wagoner's initial reluctance to wrestle with GM's bloated structure proved costly. But Mr. Wagoner's most glaring failing really wasn't his at all, but rather it was that he was a product of GM's long corroded and obsolete cultural ideal that the people who run the company should only come from the financial office. This is nothing new it should be pointed out, because it has been part of the GM raison d'etre since the Alfred Sloan era. But it was Rick Wagoner's - and GM's - reality.

But there was another side to Rick Wagoner's tenure that the instant pundits out there either refuse to acknowledge - out of their out and out hatred for anything to do with GM and Detroit - or that they simply couldn't fathom because of their abject lack of experience or what is probably closer to the truth, their complete lack of understanding of how this business actually operates. And that is that if Rick Wagoner hadn't taken the aggressively decisive actions that he did take, GM would have been out of business years ago.

Wagoner's move into the Chinese market (a continuation of the doctrine laid out by his predecessor, Jack Smith) proved to be pivotal in providing a road map for the company's future. And Wagoner's insistence on utilizing and exploiting the global capabilities of GM's far reaching corporate empire, with forays into Korea, Brazil, Mexico and Eastern Europe, laid the groundwork for a completely modernized and globally competitive endeavor.

But Wagoner's most impressive move during his tenure was to recognize his own limitations as a financially-oriented leader, while at the same time setting his own ego aside in order to bring Bob Lutz into the company. Wagoner handed Lutz the keys to GM's woefully moribund product development system and said "Fix it," while giving Lutz carte blanche to do it. And the results were magnificent. During Wagoner's tenure - while benefiting from the vision, passion and sheer will to succeed that Lutz brought to the table - GM saw its greatest design, engineering and product era since its glory days of the 60s.

The scary thing is the precedent this sets for the government coming in and meddling with a business. 'Cause the governmebnt is so good at wasting trillions of dollars and going WAY into debt, that they can tell a company like GM how to run their own business. Yeah, riiiight. 'Cause as bad as GM was, they didn't do THIS:




And now, what if I, like many thousands of business owners before me, take out an SBA guaranteed small business loan? Does that mean that the government can come in and tell me not only how to run my business, but WHO can run my business?

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by ChrisV

The scary thing is the precedent this sets for the government coming in and meddling with a business. 'Cause the governmebnt is so good at wasting trillions of dollars and going WAY into debt, that they can tell a company like GM how to run their own business. Yeah, riiiight.

And now, what if I, like many thousands of business owners before me, take out an SBA guaranteed small business loan? Does that mean that the government can come in and tell me not only how to run my business, but WHO can run my business?

I'm also a bit preturbed by the government's direct management of these corporations.... Seems to fly in the face of capitalism itself. Hey let's bail 'em out, then start making calls for them.... The government should have let business run its course. You don't keep a diseased corporation like GM around hoping that it will miraculously change. You let it die, and what business vacuum it leaves behind will be gobbled up by those corporations that weren't too stupid to survive....

And as far as the government telling anyone how to manage money... That's just a joke....

[lyndon_h]

Originally Posted by ragingclue

I'm also a bit preturbed by the government's direct management of these corporations.... Seems to fly in the face of capitalism itself. Hey let's bail 'em out, then start making calls for them.... The government should have let business run its course. You don't keep a diseased corporation like GM around hoping that it will miraculously change. You let it die, and what business vacuum it leaves behind will be gobbled up by those corporations that weren't too stupid to survive....

And as far as the government telling anyone how to manage money... That's just a joke....

Money is never free. Taking the money comes with consequences.

[ChrisV]

Originally Posted by lyndon_h

Money is never free. Taking the money comes with consequences.

Doesn't seem to have any for Congressmen, does it?

Again, how does this bode with government backed small business loans? This sets the precedent that they can come in and try to run your business for you, including telling you who can run your business.

[ragingclue]

Originally Posted by lyndon_h

Money is never free. Taking the money comes with consequences.

I still maintain that it was not a good idea for the government to get involved in the first place.

[BK]

Posturing for political benefit. No matter what the auto makers proposed, there was going to be an initial rejection for the cameras. Next time around, they will accept the plans and throw money at the companies. There will be a lot of hype about how it is the 11th hour and the businesses are teetering on the brink of collapse. But we know the government will indeed bail them out, at a cost of many billions of dollars to taxpayers.

The initial plan rejection and forced resignation of the CEO will hopefully send the message to the general public that "gee, Congress and the WH are doing a great job keeping the heat on," rather than the message that "gee, the government is throwing billions more dollars away, where are they getting the money?"

[E90330iS]

wow

[lib]

Originally Posted by BK

The initial plan rejection and forced resignation of the CEO will hopefully send the message to the general public that "gee, Congress and the WH are doing a great job keeping the heat on," rather than the message that "gee, the government is throwing billions more dollars away, where are they getting the money?"

Sadly, the later option is the reality of the situation.