Wagoner's days numbered?

http://www.thecarconnection.com/Auto_News/Driving_Forces/Are_Wagoners_Days_Numbered.S192.A10604.html

Kinda long...but doesn't sound good for Wagoner or GM...

:barf:

"and HUMMER possibly sold off" :no: :confused:

Here's hoping Rick shows he has balls of steel and tells the board that Carlos doesn't have the "testicular fortitude" to run this ship!

Here's hoping Rick shows he has balls of steel and tells the board that Carlos doesn't have the "testicular fortitude" to run this ship!
x2
"and HUMMER possibly sold off"
Selling HUMMER, Saab, and dismantling Buick now would IMHO be surefire recipes for more marketshare loss. Big mistake.

I don't know if getting rid of Wagoner is such a bad move. I particularly liked this quote:
Another movement to look for should Wagoner step down this summer is Bob Lutz's ascension to a bigger role.

If the guys on the board like Lutz's way of doing things, then I'm inclined to like the guys on the board. I think Lutz has the vision necessary to make GM a respected company.

I don't know if getting rid of Wagoner is such a bad move. I particularly liked this quote:


If the guys on the board like Lutz's way of doing things, then I'm inclined to like the guys on the board. I think Lutz has the vision necessary to make GM a respected company.
Heres the part you left out....

Both York and Ghosn admire Lutz's product development savvy. It's doubtful that Lutz would be made CEO

Spending billions on litigation and dealer buyouts to shut down Buick and Saab sounds like a great way to jumpstart recovery. :rolleyes:

I'll scream it until I'm hoarse....it's the product, stupid....and aligning yourself with Nissan (turnaround has lost steam due to stale product) and Renault of all companies for a "measily" 3 billion makes absolutely no sense to me. With the right product, GM should be able to net $3 billion annually quite easily, on its own....and from what we're hearing, that product is already on its way.

I hope to God the GM board is smarter than to cave in to the greed of an old coot looking to make a quick buck before he croaks.

Spending billions on litigation and dealer buyouts to shut down Buick and Saab sounds like a great way to jumpstart recovery. :rolleyes:

I'll scream it until I'm hoarse....it's the product, stupid....and aligning yourself with Nissan (turnaround has lost steam due to stale product) and Renault of all companies for a "measily" 3 billion makes absolutely no sense to me. With the right product, GM should be able to net $3 billion annually quite easily, on its own....and from what we're hearing, that product is already on its way.

I hope to God the GM board is smarter than to cave in to the greed of an old coot looking to make a quick buck before he croaks.

I agree completely......:Sigh:.......this sucks....:(

I've been wondering.....

If Nissan/Renault were to want to buy up to 20% of GM stock, I WONDER who has a large chunk of stock they would be willing to part with if a nice profit were to be had.....:rolleyes:

I find it funny that somebody thinks it would be a good idea for Steve Miller to be GM CEO. This is a dumb plan.

Spending billions on litigation and dealer buyouts to shut down Buick and Saab sounds like a great way to jumpstart recovery. :rolleyes:

I'll scream it until I'm hoarse....it's the product, stupid....and aligning yourself with Nissan (turnaround has lost steam due to stale product) and Renault of all companies for a "measily" 3 billion makes absolutely no sense to me. With the right product, GM should be able to net $3 billion annually quite easily, on its own....and from what we're hearing, that product is already on its way.

I hope to God the GM board is smarter than to cave in to the greed of an old coot looking to make a quick buck before he croaks.
That last line actually makes the think of typical GM.

But from what we are being assured from those here who work for the General that isnt the case anymore.

I guess the real proof will be in the pudding...

it's the product, stupid....

:yes:

Just imagine if $500 went into interiors instead of rebates. Standard 5/60,000 warranties would help GM a lot too. Big warranties are the hook that get people into Hyundias. GM needs a bigger warranty than Toyota and Honda.

"and HUMMER possibly sold off" :no: :confused:

Well, let's face it -- Right now Hummer is basically a trend -- the epitome of SUV machoism. It also seems to be a trend that's in decline, like the guys who put flaming chickens on their 3rd Gen Trans Ams.

Given enough product investment, GM might be able to turn Hummer into a long-term established brand, like Jeep. But that's going to be a stretch. We're already seeing them pushing the H3 while axing the Trailblazer ... effectively dropping out of the 'mainstream' SUV segment. How many more Chevys and Buicks are going to get canned so that Hummer can get more vehicles? It all seems like a huge gamble on the fickle public. Can GM afford to gamble? Why not sell it and get something for it while you can?

Hummer is iconic. Loose hummer and you loose an image, like 'viper'
Use it for the image.
Although this lets make a ton of hummers that are all similiar but more expensive then a tahoe is dumb.

Now does anyone in this country buy a saab? Do you know anyone other then jerry seinfeld that ever drove a saab? Would anyone here buy a saab?
I mean after all it is born from jets! Or at least a bunch of dead people that used to build jets. :rolleyes:
If your not going to advertise it right, it deserves to die no matter how much it costs you, just so I don't have to hear about how it doesn't sell.

Buick, make it something! You managed to do a damn good job of making caddilac a performance/luxury vehicle. You got rid of the land barge towncar image somewhat. You made it sporty and sexy and everything a middle age rich person who is having a mid life crisis wants to buy. Not to mention the ever solid going to florida to die crowd. It competes very well with the juggernaut BMW. Now keep going and make get it all the way there.
Now do the same thing with buick. Make it kick ass in a nitch you don't have another brand dominating yet.

Well, "Viper" isn't a volume channel -- it doesn't require 3-4 vehicles and a separate dealer network. If it stops selling, it can go away cheaply.

And I grew up in Volvos and Saabs, so I would buy one ... if they made one I liked. It's too bad -- 20 years ago Saab was in the same league as Volvo and Audi. If they took it seriously, they could get back there and sell to the Seinfelds of the world. Unlike monster trucks, you *know* there will always be a demand for european sport sedans.

I've said it once, and I'll say it again and again. Replacing Wagoner is probally the worse thing that can happen to anyone who wants GM to have a crack at surviving intact.

Like I posted in another thread, anyone with more of an eye on immediate stock value and Wall Street support is going to wonder why GM needs Buick when they have Cadillac? What purpose is Pontiac if there is Chevrolet (FWIW: Sky can easily take over as sole Kappa sports car)? Why is GM paying massive money to market the same truck line under 2 names? If Saab isn't being made in Sweden, why is it being continued?

Other questions likely to crop up to a new GM CEO:
* Why are do we need a revised RWD Kappa as a sedan when we have the FWD Delta chassis?
* Why do we need 3 RWD structures (Sigma, Zeta, and "Zeta 2")?
* If Saturn & Opel are combined, then why not combine Chevrolet and Holden (after all, that's done to a smaller degree in the middle east), and separate the names via continents just like Opel-Saturn?

I'll admit Wagoner is a connection with the old GM, and I've slammed him in the past as being far too slow in changing GM to meet the demands of today (it took last year's collaspe to get him to get GM's act together...NOW!), there is no one who is more devoted to finding money to get products online and no one who has proven more adept at getting the UAW on board than he's proven to be. Perhaps in the future someone will convince me he wasn't the right man for the job, but at the moment, I don't see anyone else on the horizon that won't bring GM back to profitablilty on the backs of major product development cuts and divisional merging or termination.


Unless your screen name is Buickman, or you are happy with GM being Chevrolet-Holden, Cadillac, Opel-Saturn, and maybe Hummer, and see no need in GM considering RWD midsize or small cars and want to see alot of vehicles in the pipeline frozen, this isn't good news.

Well, let's face it -- Right now Hummer is basically a trend -- the epitome of SUV machoism. It also seems to be a trend that's in decline, like the guys who put flaming chickens on their 3rd Gen Trans Ams.

Given enough product investment, GM might be able to turn Hummer into a long-term established brand, like Jeep. But that's going to be a stretch. We're already seeing them pushing the H3 while axing the Trailblazer ... effectively dropping out of the 'mainstream' SUV segment. How many more Chevys and Buicks are going to get canned so that Hummer can get more vehicles? It all seems like a huge gamble on the fickle public. Can GM afford to gamble? Why not sell it and get something for it while you can?

because I dont agree with you. Hummer is a direct competitor to landrover. The only Hummer that doesnt share a platform is the H1 and that ceases production shortly for the public. Are you going to sell it and continue to produce a colorodo based Plat for the H3 for a competitor? How about a Tahoe based H2 or H2 SUT? You CANT sell it literally if you wanted to! Who is going to buy a company that has none of its own platforms other than one model? Ford could try to base it off their trucks but Studebaker already did that when they coppied the H2 on a F250 plat and Called it the XUV. Ford cant base the H3 off the Ranger because the ranger being the only compact truck left is the wrong size for H3. Toyota already has the Mega Cruiser which is direct H1 competition, Land cruiser, and FJ Cruiser. The only thing they could do is sell it to their new partner Nissan and produce it for them :rolleyes: I guess they could try to base it off the Armada but why if they have a share in GM?

Im sure you know Jeep is where Hummer came from. AMC Jeep then American General HMMV(Hummer) after Jeep got sold to Chrysler, and now GM Hummer. Its no stretch of the immagination that Hummer could and should be like Jeep or more appropriately, Land Rover which literally started out as an old WWII Jeep and evolved into what it is today. The LandRover Defender is the British answer to the H1.

I agree that it isnt a large part of the market right now, but it is part of the market. There have been Jeepers since WWII and people trying to do so even before that. Its a 100 year old Fad. If either gas prices come down or there is an alternative fuel that makes it more inviting it might become more of the market. Same goes with Muscle/Pony car enthusiasts. Im certainly not for axing it, its more than just a rebadge.

Well, "Viper" isn't a volume channel -- it doesn't require 3-4 vehicles and a separate dealer network. If it stops selling, it can go away cheaply.

And I grew up in Volvos and Saabs, so I would buy one ... if they made one I liked. It's too bad -- 20 years ago Saab was in the same league as Volvo and Audi. If they took it seriously, they could get back there and sell to the Seinfelds of the world. Unlike monster trucks, you *know* there will always be a demand for european sport sedans.

20 years ago Saab was an ugly box. Hell 10 years ago it was an ugly box. I cant lie, the Aero gave me some hope for the brand. It was the only Saab I thought was drop dead gorgious I hope that is the new look of the car and it does well.

Youre saying Saab is better than Hummer because of your tastes though. I guess on mans Hummer is another mans Saab...

I've said it once, and I'll say it again and again. Replacing Wagoner is probally the worse thing that can happen to anyone who wants GM to have a crack at surviving intact.

Like I posted in another thread, anyone with more of an eye on immediate stock value and Wall Street support is going to wonder why GM needs Buick when they have Cadillac? What purpose is Pontiac if there is Chevrolet (FWIW: Sky can easily take over as sole Kappa sports car)? Why is GM paying massive money to market the same truck line under 2 names? If Saab isn't being made in Sweden, why is it being continued?

Other questions likely to crop up to a new GM CEO:
* Why are do we need a revised RWD Kappa as a sedan when we have the FWD Delta chassis?
* Why do we need 3 RWD structures (Sigma, Zeta, and "Zeta 2")?
* If Saturn & Opel are combined, then why not combine Chevrolet and Holden (after all, that's done to a smaller degree in the middle east), and separate the names via continents just like Opel-Saturn?

I'll admit Wagoner is a connection with the old GM, and I've slammed him in the past as being far too slow in changing GM to meet the demands of today (it took last year's collaspe to get him to get GM's act together...NOW!), there is no one who is more devoted to finding money to get products online and no one who has proven more adept at getting the UAW on board than he's proven to be. Perhaps in the future someone will convince me he wasn't the right man for the job, but at the moment, I don't see anyone else on the horizon that won't bring GM back to profitablilty on the backs of major product development cuts and divisional merging or termination.


Unless your screen name is Buickman, or you are happy with GM being Chevrolet-Holden, Cadillac, Opel-Saturn, and maybe Hummer, and see no need in GM considering RWD midsize or small cars and want to see alot of vehicles in the pipeline frozen, this isn't good news.

I thought Zeta 2 replaced Zeta?

:yes:

Just imagine if $500 went into interiors instead of rebates. Standard 5/60,000 warranties would help GM a lot too. Big warranties are the hook that get people into Hyundias. GM needs a bigger warranty than Toyota and Honda.

I just lost a sale on a Caravan to a lady that bought a Kia Sedona SOLELY because of the damn warranty!

because I dont agree with you. Hummer is a direct competitor to landrover.

Not at all. GM's plans to sell 100K Hummers a year - it's not going to be a luxury niche brand like Rover.

How are they planning to do this? By killing other SUVs like Trailblazer. :confused:

Youre saying Saab is better than Hummer because of your tastes though. I guess on mans Hummer is another mans Saab...

Possibly so, but I see a lot more Volvos, Audis, and BMWs than I do Hummers and other macho SUVs. It seems like a much more established market.

Not at all. GM's plans to sell 100K Hummers a year - it's not going to be a luxury niche brand like Rover.

How are they planning to do this? By killing other SUVs like Trailblazer. :confused:

Luxury is only a small part of Land Rover. Theres absoloutely NOTHING luxury about the Defender BTW. It was designed so you could take a hose to the interior to get the mud out. Unfortunatley the Defender isnt legal here anymore because of no side impact bars but with the size of that frame they didnt need it. A buddy of mine had a 1998 Defender 90 new. We had it through the woods and back. They are impressive! Their main goal is and always has been off road capabilities from day one. They arent used in Africa or the British military for luxury...


Possibly so, but I see a lot more Volvos, Audis, and BMWs than I do Hummers and other macho SUVs. It seems like a much more established market.

What do BMW, Audi and Volvo have to do with Saab? You differentiate Landrover and Hummer but then in the same breath lump Saab with Audi, Volvo and BMW or better yet dont mention Saab at all? How does that work? Of course you see more of three brands that arent Saab than the one brand Hummer.

I don't know if getting rid of Wagoner is such a bad move. I particularly liked this quote:


If the guys on the board like Lutz's way of doing things, then I'm inclined to like the guys on the board. I think Lutz has the vision necessary to make GM a respected company.


I like the sound of that myself