Comments on: The Slow Death of General Motors

By: Sujay

Sujay — Mon, 27 Jul 2009 11:27:56 +0000

American cars companies have done fairly well in India.. Ford and General motors. I drive an American car in India. In is only in the past one year that sales of American cars have taken a hit.

By: Why Ford Will be the Last U.S. Automaker Standing

Why Ford Will be the Last U.S. Automaker Standing — Mon, 11 May 2009 23:22:59 +0000

[...] GM is a somewhat different proposition, whether it goes through a formal Chapter 11 bankruptcy or not – which we’ll know by the end of this month. Unlike Chrysler, GM has a full product development capability and has scored some major successes internationally. [...]

By: U.S. Auto Industry Spins Out of Control, as Chrysler Goes Bankrupt and GM Struggles to Reverse Course

Fri, 01 May 2009 09:36:41 +0000

[...] Money Morning: The Slow Death of General Motors [...]

By: Supplier Bob

Supplier Bob — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 23:24:24 +0000

Excellent forum guys.
I can agree with most of the comments as to the possible(or is that imminent?) demise of GM. While i currently don’t drive a GM product, i have in the past and am an avid historian of the company.
I am loathed to portion blame as to the main reason for the demise, all of those mentioned previously add up to an insurmountable total. I’d like to add one to the list.
As a supplier to several auto companies, it is GM’s purchasing policies/methods/relationship that baffle me most. Why do they have such a hard line with arbitrary , unrealistic cost down targets , hostile take it or leave it type relationships/demands and contract clauses/imbalances that actually stymies improvement and adds cost! The most productive suppler to work with? Toyota. They have a simple partnership approach with suppliers.
GM use a ‘best landed cost’ benchmark. Essentially this means i have to match that price. On one part i lost to an overseas supplier, the plant takes longer to fit that part and have more defects. Purchasing dept rewarded for lowering the part cost, plant costs go up for more rework, bottom line, it actually costs them more.
I want GM to succeed, its an incredibly iconic brand and provides much needed employment and tax revenue.

By: The Slow Death of General Motors

The Slow Death of General Motors — Thu, 16 Apr 2009 15:13:51 +0000

[...] By Martin Hutchinson Editor, Permanent Wealth Investor Money Morning, Investment News [...]

By: U.S. Treasury to GM: Prepare for Bankruptcy

U.S. Treasury to GM: Prepare for Bankruptcy — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 19:40:42 +0000

[...] Money Morning: The Slow Death of General Motors [...]

By: Paul Fox

Paul Fox — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 20:57:36 +0000

Martin Hutchinson’s fawning support for the now departed GM C.E.O., G. Richard Wagoner Jr., seems to missunderstand the function of managment which is to anticipate the markets and to make products that the markets want/need. One of the reasons that Ford hs not as yet required government money is that they already negotiated a better (for them) contract with the U.A.W. To bame the “bicoastal media” is ridiculous since the bicoastal areas represent the largest car market in the U.S. Obviously, GM has not been making enough new cars that the American public wants to buy. Proof enough for this fact lies in Mr. Hutchinson’s admission that he drives an “ancient” Buick.

By: JIM

JIM — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 16:09:58 +0000

Most of the comments here have good points but as a white collar GM employee I can tell you the main reasons for failure are not mentioned.

By: DG

DG — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 07:13:39 +0000

When I read this story about poor build quality; subpar materials and a lazy unionized labour force it kind of makes me smile.

This is all a deja vu; just look up the history of Alfa Romeo and the Alfa Sud. The Italian state (majority share holder in Alfa; because of the 70’s crisis; sounds familiar?) wanted to address unemployement in the South. So they build this plant and offered a job to all these communist day labourers that were used to a 3 daywork-week in the fields.

Ofcourse the government (they know best!) also mandated exactly what kind of steel should be used for to build the chassis (they ahd negotiated a barter deal with the Soviets).

The factory was the scene of quasi permanent strikes and outright worker’s sabotage. It took years before the state decided to confront the situation and wanted stop hemoragging taxpayers money.

What happened? The Alfa Sud was sort of a commercial success (it was cheap, sporty and appealled to the young) but it destroyed Alfa’s reputation for building cars that were ahead of the competion in terms of engineering advancements. It lost that reputation forever.

Eventually that state closed the Alfa Sud plant and sold the shared to Fiat. Fiat almost bled dry and went bankrupt in trying to rebuild the Alfa brand.

Now ofcourse the US govt’is hoping the Fiat can also save Chrysler. But Chrysler isn’t Alfa. Alfa was never a multi-billion dollar industrial conglomerate. Before the Alfa Sud it was a minor player that build cars for profit to partecipate in races. Chrysler is way to big for Fiat to succesfully digest it. GM and Fiat tried to partner before; and didn’t work out either.

By: Jon

Jon — Mon, 06 Apr 2009 05:34:35 +0000

“The success or failure of any enterprise is the direct responsibility of its management”.The UAW made not the first decision concerning GM or any other automobile company.It amazes that any with a driver`s license thinks they know how to run a car company.I guarantee Timid Tim and his erstwhile employer haven`t a clue.The so-called labor costs are often less than advertising costs for some models.If the U.S. companies labor costs are so unworkable how did Ford set the profitability record (since surpassed by Toyota) a short ten years ago?One huge problem that is never acknowledged is the at least four different subsidies that foreign competitors enjoy vis-a-vis the domestic industry.Government policy ranging from CAFE to taxation has driven half of the industry offshore with the other half hanging on for dear life.Academia in the future will recognize this as no less than protracted industrial suicide in its case studies.Almost all of the previous comments are clearly made by people who know little of which they write.That never seems to stop rhem.