Hypothetical Question RE: Improving GM Quality Image

Lions3
11-30-2005, 12:58 PM
I came up with this idea after hearing people say that even though GM is losing money, they would still be able to operate for many years due to the amount of money in their bank account.

The question I have is this: How feasible would it be for GM to start selling entry level vehicles at a loss in North America for a few years?

What I was thinking is that the money they lose on each vehicle could be used to put much more content into their vehicles. I'm not talking about making the SS versions the same price as the entry level variant. What I'm talking about is taking the entry level version, putting double the effort (At maybe what, 30-40% more cost?) into fit and finish and making hardware rock solid. I mean how far could 500-1000$ of retail loss go towards R&D and assembly costs per vehicle? From the beginning of the design process, they come up with an estimated retail price. Say they design a car that after all said and done should have a dealer invoice for 30,000$, what real harm would be done if they sold it for say 27,000$?

I think they could offset the costs by offering no discounts/rebates on SS/V variants, maybe charing 2-5% more for options. This would also go hand in hand with forcing dealerships into a value pricing strategy, so they can't sell the vehicles for what the used to sell for and just make more profit on the retail end. Also any loss on any vehicle can be labeled a loss leader, and written off come tax time.

Take this plan, use it for a 3-4 year period, and then slowly start increasing the cost of each vehicle as they get redesigned or when new models come out to eventually make profit again, while still offering world class build quality.

I got this idea from a couple experiences. One is that it is common practice in retail to build clientel by offering steep discounts on your first sale, and then as time goes on offer them a more reasonable discount. People will buy on value over trust any day. Why do you think when new retail stores open, they always have a "Grand opening sale!"?

Second is looking at what most upstart companies have been doing in the automotive world. How long has it been that Hyundai has had a car over 30,000$? Within the last few years the price of their vehicles has jumped up dramatically, all the while they are gaining market share. Reel 'em in with cheap, decent, reliable cars (Or advertise a 10 year warranty), and then a few years later reel 'em in again with more content and make more profit on more expensive cars.

I know this may get shot down right quick, but it's a thought. I see it as a possible way to gain market share and public acceptance again, and then go on a rampage 10-15 years from now with future vehicle development. Possible flaws I see in this idea is that for every dollar they lose on every vehicle they sell, there goes a dollar that should go to pay costs (R&D for future vehicles, wages, pensions etc etc) compounded by the fact that even with the market share they have now, and even though it won't be for ALL vehicles they sell, that's still a lot of cars to be losing money on.

Threxx
11-30-2005, 01:20 PM
They need to keep their pricing just as is but bump the warranties to 100k miles bumper to bumper, no questions asked, no deductables, etc.

Then start a campaign sorta calling everyone else out about how GM is confident enough to put their warranty where their mouth is.

I think that would be a brilliantly effective campaign that would eventually allow them to reduce rebates and discounts to the point of no longer losing money.

The problem is I think GM realizes this but just isn't confident enough in their vehicles to warranty them for that long with no additional cost to the consumer...

guionM
11-30-2005, 01:29 PM
Lyons3, Bob Lutz is about 3 years ahead of you on this. Unfortunately, it takes years to get new cars through the pipeline.

He came in with the logic that if GM put an extra X-hundred dollars into improved materials and noticable quality, they wouldn't have to stack $4,000 worth of incentives on the hood. But if take an old existing design, you can only take it so far. As a result, the long in tooth Grand Prix has a far better interior and quality than it did when it 1st came out, but it doesn't touch the HHR. The interior in the brand new Lecerne is better made than the ones in Cadillac 4 years ago.

Hyundai has taken almost 15 years to shed their early image of being junk (as anyone who owned them the 1st few years they were in the US). GM has been seriously working to turn themselves around for about 3 years. It's going to take time.... yes, we know GM doesn't have too much of that left.

3SuperSports
11-30-2005, 01:37 PM
They need to keep their pricing just as is but bump the warranties to 100k miles bumper to bumper, no questions asked, no deductables, etc.

Then start a campaign sorta calling everyone else out about how GM is confident enough to put their warranty where their mouth is.

I think that would be a brilliantly effective campaign that would eventually allow them to reduce rebates and discounts to the point of no longer losing money.

The problem is I think GM realizes this but just isn't confident enough in their vehicles to warranty them for that long with no additional cost to the consumer...

This is something I had brought up in an old post, and I beleive it's a key issue.
Why I think they don't want to do it, is because (if I remember correctly) I've heard that stealerships make the most profit in the service department and if you've ever stood in the lobby of one with your pants around your ankles, you know it's true. Now, take that into account with the fact that GM is going to pay the dealership a set amount for specific repairs and the high profit opportunity is now greatly diminished.

Threxx
11-30-2005, 02:01 PM
This is something I had brought up in an old post, and I beleive it's a key issue.
Why I think they don't want to do it, is because (if I remember correctly) I've heard that stealerships make the most profit in the service department and if you've ever stood in the lobby of one with your pants around your ankles, you know it's true. Now, take that into account with the fact that GM is going to pay the dealership a set amount for specific repairs and the high profit opportunity is now greatly diminished.

GM has historically made a killing by raping its customers after the sale. That's almost exactly why they're in this crappy position today. They've lost their reputation among consumers.

GM must become a company who makes money on selling cars that last.

stangitr
11-30-2005, 02:11 PM
I don't think that would make the stockholders too happy

NewbieWar
11-30-2005, 03:23 PM
I don't think that would make the stockholders too happy

who cares what stockholders think... Stockholders only care about today...

We must worry about the customers! Make the customers happy and in a year or two the stockholders will be jumping for joy

stangitr
11-30-2005, 05:59 PM
who cares what stockholders think... Stockholders only care about today...


LOL well they do own the company